Mine That Bird

[reese]

Originally Posted by Gander

I dont know why they would put Mike Smith on Mine that Bird again, when there are so many better jockeys already at Saratoga that will no doubt be rideless for the Travers. Coming to mind would be guys like Castellano, Chavez, Lezcano and C Velasquez. What is the huge appeal with Mike Smith that anybody would want to foot the expense of shipping him in?

Ever hear about the HOF? Which of the jocks YOU cited are IN the HOF?

[Travis Stone]

Life and death in the Preakness would have been a nose, but with another 16th of a mile, the result could have easily gone the other way.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Life and death in the Preakness would have been a nose, but with another 16th of a mile, the result could have easily gone the other way.

Personally I can't wait to bet against Rachel, she's had one great scenario after the other with the only adversity coming in the Preakness. She's going into the Travers(?) as the big name, everyone's favorite horse, that she's going to be overbet, if she gets abit of adversity the result could be as close as The Preakness that any value bettor must be salavating at the chance to take her on.

[Gander]

From everything I have heard from people close to the decision makers is there is very little chance you'll see her in the Travers. Its between the Woodward and PA Derby. Of course I hope I am wrong and she shows up next weekend.

They say that her last workout was her best ever and it could be a huge mistake to wait 1 extra week to run her. Shes ready to run now. The Travers comes up as perfect timing. Would be a race for the ages.

[boswd]

Originally Posted by Gander

From everything I have heard from people close to the decision makers is there is very little chance you'll see her in the Travers. Its between the Woodward and PA Derby. Of course I hope I am wrong and she shows up next weekend.

They say that her last workout was her best ever and it could be a huge mistake to wait 1 extra week to run her. Shes ready to run now. The Travers comes up as perfect timing. Would be a race for the ages.

I just don't understand the logic on running her in the Pa Derby. If Phila Park starts throwing her bonus incentives and such then Jess Jackson just looks like he's ducking to grab an easy extra money. I mean the guy sports himself as liking a challenge, how does going the Pa. Derby challenge her?

She doesn't race in the Alabama because their is nothing to prove in her division, fine I'll go with that, Running her in the Traver's proves very little because she already beaten the boys twice, so what does running her in the Pa Derby against lesser competition prove?

Outside of grabbing extra purse money, I fail to find the logic as it implies to Jess Jackson wanting to have a challenge.

[CSC]

I want to make a clarification on an earlier statement I made, when I referred to different pace dynamics that RA will be facing in the 'perhaps wishful thinking' Travers. I also mean't race dynamics. Ie. possible jostling about, possible larger field of colts, possible jocky intimidation, and traffic. In short a different set of dynamics to her previous races. I think this is a significant point and thought it worthy to mention so that there is no misunderstanding.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by CSC

I want to make a clarification on an earlier statement I made, when I referred to different pace dynamics that RA will be facing in the 'perhaps wishful thinking' Travers. I also mean't race dynamics. Ie. possible jostling about, possible larger field of colts, possible jocky intimidation, and traffic. In short a different set of dynamics to her previous races. I think this is a significant point and thought it worthy to mention so that there is no misunderstanding.

I get it, so what you're saying is that a filly who's perfect on the year, has beaten males twice, scored in a field of 13, has an on the pace running style that keeps her free from trouble and a jockey who cut his teeth at bush tracks in Louisiana is susceptible to all types of hypthetical trip problems. Gotcha.

And if through some confluence of events making all the things you mentioned above happen then a horse who has basically one race of consequence which was run at a distance that suited him to a T can reverse a decision in which he was beaten like a drum by the filly in question. Gotcha.

Look, it's OK if you're gonna bet against Rachel Alexandra, really it is. I'd just suggest you say you're gonna bet against her instead of coming up with some of these ridiculous scenarios that could lead to her defeat.

NT

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by CSC

Personally I can't wait to bet against Rachel, she's had one great scenario after the other with the only adversity coming in the Preakness. She's going into the Travers(?) as the big name, everyone's favorite horse, that she's going to be overbet, if she gets abit of adversity the result could be as close as The Preakness that any value bettor must be salavating at the chance to take her on.

You have to be careful with these words... lots of Rachel fans out there (myself included). But, I agree. I thought the same thing about Zenyatta a few weeks ago, but she overcame and often times the great ones do but I'd be willing to take my chances.

If you consider the Haskell... sure, the fractions were awfully quick, but Munnings held on for third. The difference between the Haskell/Preakness was there were no quality closers in the Haskell. In the Preakness, Mine That Bird put in a legitimate run and almost got there.

My ultimate opinion on all of this is that Rachel Alexandra should be in the Travers because it's the Travers. There's a Woodward next year for her. And plus, Quality Road, whom I believe is an extremely talented race horse, is the only one she hasn't beat and I would like to see the match-up. I know that Quality Road could be light on seasoning but that nagging "what if" is out there.

I get the Kensei argument and the stud value for winning a grade one, but Jess Jackson wrote a $10 million check, so the stud value and wishing the purses were higher stuff is weak in my opinion. Money is not a concern. Then again, he's a business man, and I can't fault that line of thinking.

Only in horse racing can the best horse have legitimate reasoning for skipping the biggest races. In any other sport the biggest events will have the biggest stars - guaranteed. Barring injury, the US Open will never not have Tiger Woods etc.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

You have to be careful with these words... lots of Rachel fans out there (myself included). But, I agree. I thought the same thing about Zenyatta a few weeks ago, but she overcame and often times the great ones do but I'd be willing to take my chances.

If you consider the Haskell... sure, the fractions were awfully quick, but Munnings held on for third. The difference between the Haskell/Preakness was there were no quality closers in the Haskell. In the Preakness, Mine That Bird put in a legitimate run and almost got there.

My ultimate opinion on all of this is that Rachel Alexandra should be in the Travers because it's the Travers. There's a Woodward next year for her. And plus, Quality Road, whom I believe is an extremely talented race horse, is the only one she hasn't beat and I would like to see the match-up. I know that Quality Road could be light on seasoning but that nagging "what if" is out there.

I get the Kensei argument and the stud value for winning a grade one, but Jess Jackson wrote a $10 million check, so the stud value and wishing the purses were higher stuff is weak in my opinion. Money is not a concern. Then again, he's a business man, and I can't fault that line of thinking.

Only in horse racing can the best horse have legitimate reasoning for skipping the biggest races.

Just to clarify Travis and all RA fans, there was no ill intent intended with my post regarding RA's remarkable good fortune to date, I guess if you use the law of averages she cannot keep winning by the margins she is putting up, if we step back and examine the tracks and dynamics in her races she has had it relatively her way with the lone exception being the Preakness, mine you if not for a better ride by Smith she may have beaten . Don't get me wrong I am in the camp that RA is a great filly, do I think she is as good as the margins she is winning at, honestly I don't know, I do believe that if she does go in the Travers this will be the race that may truly defines her, this will be a true test for any worthy champion.

[Bobby Fischer]

Originally Posted by CSC

Personally I can't wait to bet against Rachel, she's had one great scenario after the other with the only adversity coming in the Preakness. She's going into the Travers(?) as the big name, everyone's favorite horse, that she's going to be overbet, if she gets abit of adversity the result could be as close as The Preakness that any value bettor must be salavating at the chance to take her on.

You are one of the sharper players/cappers on the net, so i always consider what you say. I just don't think the Preakness was close at all.


not only is Rachel better than her competition, but she also dictates the style to a degree. She can go faster than anybody else that hopes to compete. Unlike Zenyatta, who can conceivably lose vs. lesser horses if they run a tactical race against her, Rachel has to regress, or even less likely someone else has to reach her remarkable level. No one has really been at her level on dirt since Curlin's peak. Big Brown probably wasn't as good, even with as much as he overcame in the Haskel and Florida Derby.

In the Preakness Borel ended the race at the top of the stretch. She reached an insurmountable lead at that point and just had to finish, with the diminishing margin not really reflecting a competitiveness for MTB. It can be debated that Borel asked her for her final bid too early in the Preakness. And then that pace was so brutal with the chasers all collapsing so badly, I know being on the lead can at times be much easier than chasing the lead in a pace like that, but it still has to be considered a very hard pace to be on with MTB having anywhere from a moderate to extreme advantage in setup...

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

You are one of the sharper players/cappers on the net, so i always consider what you say. I just don't think the Preakness was close at all.


not only is Rachel better than her competition, but she also dictates the style to a degree. She can go faster than anybody else that hopes to compete. Unlike Zenyatta, who can conceivably lose vs. lesser horses if they run a tactical race against her, Rachel has to regress, or even less likely someone else has to reach her remarkable level. No one has really been at her level on dirt since Curlin's peak. Big Brown probably wasn't as good, even with as much as he overcame in the Haskel and Florida Derby.

In the Preakness Borel ended the race at the top of the stretch. She reached an insurmountable lead at that point and just had to finish, with the diminishing margin not really reflecting a competitiveness for MTB. It can be debated that Borel asked her for her final bid too early in the Preakness. And then that pace was so brutal with the chasers all collapsing so badly, I know being on the lead can at times be much easier than chasing the lead in a pace like that, but it still has to be considered a very hard pace to be on with MTB having anywhere from a moderate to extreme advantage in setup...

Pace dynamics can never be underestimated, this isn't the best example but Exceller once beat Affirmed and Seattle Slew. Maybe she is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but for me I am willing to try beating her when I see a chance she will finally be tested. However this is all conjecture for now pending Kensai's work tommorow.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

You are one of the sharper players/cappers on the net, so i always consider what you say. I just don't think the Preakness was close at all.


not only is Rachel better than her competition, but she also dictates the style to a degree. She can go faster than anybody else that hopes to compete. Unlike Zenyatta, who can conceivably lose vs. lesser horses if they run a tactical race against her, Rachel has to regress, or even less likely someone else has to reach her remarkable level. No one has really been at her level on dirt since Curlin's peak. Big Brown probably wasn't as good, even with as much as he overcame in the Haskel and Florida Derby.

In the Preakness Borel ended the race at the top of the stretch. She reached an insurmountable lead at that point and just had to finish, with the diminishing margin not really reflecting a competitiveness for MTB. It can be debated that Borel asked her for her final bid too early in the Preakness. And then that pace was so brutal with the chasers all collapsing so badly, I know being on the lead can at times be much easier than chasing the lead in a pace like that, but it still has to be considered a very hard pace to be on with MTB having anywhere from a moderate to extreme advantage in setup...

I find some people's reaction to the Preakness hilarious. Rachel ran hard for 1 3/16ths that day and Mine That Bird ran hard for 3 furlongs that day. She's 5 times the horse MTB/Summer Bird/Munnings/anyone she's faced are. I would like to see her and Quality Road at 1 1/8th... though I think she would win by 5 again.. she may only be twice the horse QR is..

the ONLY reason MTB was so close that day is she had to set some big time fractions and put away some real good sprinters (Big Drama) before MTB got within 15 feet of her at the wire.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by CSC

Just to clarify Travis and all RA fans, there was no ill intent intended with my post regarding RA's remarkable good fortune to date, I guess if you use the law of averages she cannot keep winning by the margins she is putting up, if we step back and examine the tracks and dynamics in her races she has had it relatively her way with the lone exception being the Preakness, mine you if not for a better ride by Smith she may have beaten . Don't get me wrong I am in the camp that RA is a great filly, do I think she is as good as the margins she is winning at, honestly I don't know, I do believe that if she does go in the Travers this will be the race that may truly defines her, this will be a true test for any worthy champion.

Why would beating Summer Bird and friends be such a big deal? Other then Quality Road and his bizarre 6.5f win, what makes the Travers such a biggie? Unless Quality Road is capable of a 115 BSf at 10f's the race is a matter of fact.. Face it she is just faster plain and simple..

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by CSC

Just to clarify Travis and all RA fans, there was no ill intent intended with my post regarding RA's remarkable good fortune to date

I wasn't knocking you at all, I was being tongue-in-cheek with the be careful statement.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by CSC

Personally I can't wait to bet against Rachel, she's had one great scenario after the other with the only adversity coming in the Preakness. She's going into the Travers(?) as the big name, everyone's favorite horse, that she's going to be overbet, if she gets abit of adversity the result could be as close as The Preakness that any value bettor must be salavating at the chance to take her on.

You think your horse Summer Bird could reverse that decision on Rachel? I mean he probably cooled out great after the Haskell considering he felt a good gust as she absolutely blew his doors off.

NT

[CSC]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

You think your horse Summer Bird could reverse that decision on Rachel? I mean he probably cooled out great after the Haskell considering he felt a good gust as she absolutely blew his doors off.

NT

My logic is Summer Bird was taken out of his game in the Haskell, not to Kent's fault, he knew if he sat back and made one run it would have been for running for no better than 2nd. So he took a shot, the Travers is going to be far more favorable to him with the extra distance and the possible pace dynamics. RA is obviously a great horse, we will see or hopefully Kensai won't work well tommorow so she will be entered...how she will handle this field and track. The competition and tracks of Belmont, CD, and Monmouth presented no difficulties for her, if she goes next Saturday I think it's fair to say this will be her biggest challenge. All I know is Summer Bird is training well, and he had a good prep in the no chance Haskell, he's still improving, it will be interesting if he can close the gap on RA with a more favorable track and set up. Oddswise this is the time to try, if she wins you just tip your cap, go back to the dugout and admire a special horse.

[Gander]

Originally Posted by reese

[/b]

Ever hear about the HOF? Which of the jocks YOU cited are IN the HOF?

The HOF didnt seem to matter in the West Virginia Derby, Smith didnt time it right at all. Borel gave him a crappy ride in the Belmont. Time before that Smith again didnt give the horse a chance (Preakness).

What makes you so sure a guy not in the HOF like Chavez or Lezcano couldnt do any better aboard this horse? Give me a break, its not like this horse has been give good rides and just come up short.

I'd like to see what Mike Smith could do day to day riding in NY. My guess is middle of the standings at best.

[ARyan]

Originally Posted by Gander

The HOF didnt seem to matter in the West Virginia Derby, Smith didnt time it right at all. Borel gave him a crappy ride in the Belmont. Time before that Smith again didnt give the horse a chance (Preakness).

What makes you so sure a guy not in the HOF like Chavez or Lezcano couldnt do any better aboard this horse? Give me a break, its not like this horse has been give good rides and just come up short.

I'd like to see what Mike Smith could do day to day riding in NY. My guess is middle of the standings at best.

My guess is below Mike Luzzi, slightly above Morales.

[reese]

Originally Posted by Gander
The HOF didnt seem to matter in the West Virginia Derby, Smith didnt time it right at all. Borel gave him a crappy ride in the Belmont. Time before that Smith again didnt give the horse a chance (Preakness).

What makes you so sure a guy not in the HOF like Chavez or Lezcano couldnt do any better aboard this horse? Give me a break, its not like this horse has been give good rides and just come up short.
[b]
I'd like to see what Mike Smith could do day to day riding in NY.


[B]

Originally Posted by ARyan

My guess is below Mike Luzzi, slightly above Morales[/

Originally Posted by ARyan

B].

Talk about being clueless ..Mike Smith wins Pac Classic on Baffert's 24-1 Richard's Kid

[Gander]

Originally Posted by reese

Originally Posted by Gander
The HOF didnt seem to matter in the West Virginia Derby, Smith didnt time it right at all. Borel gave him a crappy ride in the Belmont. Time before that Smith again didnt give the horse a chance (Preakness).

What makes you so sure a guy not in the HOF like Chavez or Lezcano couldnt do any better aboard this horse? Give me a break, its not like this horse has been give good rides and just come up short.
[b]
I'd like to see what Mike Smith could do day to day riding in NY.


[[b]B]


Talk about being clueless ..Mike Smith wins Pac Classic on Baffert's 24-1 Richard's Kid

It was a great win for Mike Smith, but was it really all that great of a ride? The horse had tons coming down the stretch and the only horse that wasnt gasping was Einstein.