134th Preakness Field Close to Set

[philcski]

Originally Posted by cakes44

You would think. But then you might watch Smith on Lionheart a few years back and wonder what the heck is going on here.

What did Smith do wrong on Lion Heart? He ran great in the Derby.

[cakes44]

Originally Posted by philcski

What did Smith do wrong on Lion Heart? He ran great in the Derby.

Damn right he did. I was talking about the Preakness. I think he went 4-wide on the lead all the way around the track.

[Gander]

Originally Posted by cakes44

Damn right he did. I was talking about the Preakness. I think he went 4-wide on the lead all the way around the track.

What does that have to do with Johnny V riding a horse like Big Drama who always goes to the lead, and now finds himself in perhaps the most paceless race hes ever been in?

I think if you like Big Drama at all, you have to be thrilled with his post. Is there any other post a horse like him could get that would be better?

[philcski]

Originally Posted by cakes44

Damn right he did. I was talking about the Preakness. I think he went 4-wide on the lead all the way around the track.

True... looked like a very tired horse that day. Horse had shown a lot of tenacity in every race and offered no resistance that day. I guess with Mike Smith you kind of assume he starts in the 4 path and works his way out.

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

He's talking about LH in the Preakness, when he ran fifth I believe. Can't remember the race well enough to say what Smith did wrong.

LH broke on top, SJ stalking, Eddington & RHT started their rallies entering the far turn, Elliott said go at that point and the race was over.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by philcski

What did Smith do wrong on Lion Heart? He ran great in the Derby.

He's talking about LH in the Preakness, when he ran fifth I believe. Can't remember the race well enough to say what Smith did wrong.

[cakes44]

It probably doesn't have a whole lot to do with Velazquez/Big Drama. I just brought up a situation where having the rail with the lone speed doesn't help.

More than anything, I just watched the 2004 Preakness again last night and thought the ride was comical.

[CSC]

I don't want to turn this into a Mike Smith bashing thread, but it seems to me he has lucked into more good horses in his time than many other riders Ie. Lure, Azeri, Zenyatta, Holy Bull...ect than actually making a difference on a horse. You could easily make a case any rider worth his salt would have no trouble winning with these horses. He rarely makes a difference in a race, and honestly when I bet horses he is on I just hope he doesn't Fcuk up.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Smith is a shell of his former self at this point in his career. I won't deny he has lost more than a few steps and he is no longer a go to rider. But, when he was riding Lure and Holy Bull he was at worst the second best rider in NY in my opinion.

People forget he was the leading rider in NY from 1991-1993. He won the eclipse in 1993 and 1994 as top rider. In 1994 he won 20 grade 1 stakes and a total of 68 stakes races, which at that time broke his own record for stakes wins in a year. There is a reason he was riding good horses, he was a very good jockey. I think he's leary of going inside now due to his horrific falls in 1998. I'm not making excuses for him treating the 4 wide path as the rail nowadays, but it wasn't luck that got him those mounts. He earned them.

Actually I agree, good citations of bringing up those stats from his good years. He was always in Bailey's shadow and whether one likes Bailey personally or not, no one could dispute he was a great rider. The difference from the 2 in my opinion is Bailey could make a difference in a horse's performance often bringing in the less superior horse, problem is you still wouldn't get fair value because people bet jockies. Mike's wide moves were also well suited for Belmont and I often wonder wouldn't N.Y be better suited for his riding style, Though I do understand why he moved due to declining mounts.

[Sightseek]

For someone who has sent Pletcher off to the Derby with plenty of horses that were hopeless, I find it comical that Lucarelli accuses Jackson of "self-serving interest" for entering Rachel.

http://www.drf.com/news/article/103774.html

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

For someone who has sent Pletcher off to the Derby with plenty of horses that were hopeless, I find it comical that Lucarelli accuses Jackson of "self-serving interest" for entering Rachel.

http://www.drf.com/news/article/103774.html

What a tool