5/15 (PIM): 135th Preakness S. (G1)

[CSC]

I bet if they ran this race again next weekend, we would have another random winner. No one truly stood out yesterday, these are a very mediocre bunch.

[westcoastinvader]

Originally Posted by CSC

I bet if they ran this race again next weekend, we would have another random winner. No one truly stood out yesterday, these are a very mediocre bunch.

I dunno.

I see Lookin at Lucky differently.

He stumbled in The Rebel on the Oaklawn surface and still finished strong to win.

He was stopped and steadied on the Santa Anita surface and still rallied to catch 3rd.

He had a unanimously accepted horrible trip on sloppy dirt in the Kentucky Derby and still was fighting and closing in the stretch.

He then goes to the Pimlico surface and is tested in a stretch fight and rallies to pull away for the win.

He's 7-1-1 in 10 career starts with a laundry list of 9 G-1's and G-2's on his 10 race resume.


He's 3 years old this month and is already a winner of over $2,000,000.

I think he's pretty good.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by westcoastinvader

I dunno.

I see Looking at Lucky differently.

He stumbled in The Rebel on the Oaklawn surface and still finished strong to win.

He was stopped and steadied on the Santa Anita surface and still rallied to catch 3rd.

He had a unanimously accepted horrible trip on sloppy dirt in the Kentucky Derby and still was fighting and closing in the stretch.

He then goes to the Pimlico surface and is tested in a stretch fight and rallies to pull away for the win.

He's 7-1-1 in 10 career starts with a laundry list of 9 G-1's and G-2's on his 10 race resume.


He's 3 years old this month and is already a winner of over $2,000,000.

I think he's pretty good.

He's a grinder that will win his share of races, I haven't seen anything yet from him to say here is a horse that will go on to the top of the male division this year or against his elders. Sure I would be happy if I owned him, he's already been a great investment to his connections for a okay horse.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by westcoastinvader

I dunno.

I see Lookin at Lucky differently.

He stumbled in The Rebel on the Oaklawn surface and still finished strong to win.

He was stopped and steadied on the Santa Anita surface and still rallied to catch 3rd.

He had a unanimously accepted horrible trip on sloppy dirt in the Kentucky Derby and still was fighting and closing in the stretch.

He then goes to the Pimlico surface and is tested in a stretch fight and rallies to pull away for the win.

He's 7-1-1 in 10 career starts with a laundry list of 9 G-1's and G-2's on his 10 race resume.


He's 3 years old this month and is already a winner of over $2,000,000.

I think he's pretty good.

Looking at lucky is far more accomplished than good

[Cannon Shell]

2010 features a historically bad group of older 'handicap' horses in a millennium that had hardly distinguished itself for older horses. Yet I dont think any of the three year olds we've seen so far will be able to capitalize on that.

[CSC]

What could have been had Summer Bird never been hurt last year.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Looking at lucky is far more accomplished than good

i agree. someone had to win all that money. they don't cut the purse because the horses don't run fast.

[2Hot4TV]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Looking at lucky is far more accomplished than good

There is something to be said for a horse like LAL, he's willing, keeps to his task and doesnt quit when he gets the lead. The thing to be said about LAL is we wish we had him in our barn.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by 2Hot4TV

There is something to be said for a horse like LAL, he's willing, keeps to his task and doesnt quit when he gets the lead. The thing to be said about LAL is we wish we had him in our barn.

no doubt but these are classic races therefore we hold the winners to a higher standard

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by CSC

I bet if they ran this race again next weekend, we would have another random winner. No one truly stood out yesterday, these are a very mediocre bunch.

That might be the case that this is a mediocre bunch but its not like Lucky got up in some head bob. The winner sustained a long and powerful run 4 wide against a strong inside bias. What could have possibly changed the result besides maybe the 11 or the 8 running alone uncontested on the rail?

There was no magical seam, no rail card and no pace help. The winner wins that race a majority of the time.

[Indian Charlie]

I love how early criticisms on LAL included him being too fast for his own good.

Now he's slow and a grinder.

I don't get the love for Jackson Bend nor do I get the dislike for LAL. They are kinda similar horses, except LAL is the better of the two.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

That might be the case that this is a mediocre bunch but its not like Lucky got up in some head bob. The winner sustained a long and powerful run 4 wide against a strong inside bias. What could have possibly changed the result besides maybe the 11 or the 8 running alone uncontested on the rail?

There was no magical seam, no rail card and no pace help. The winner wins that race a majority of the time.

He finishes a well beaten third in last year's Preakness IMO with the same trip fighting it out for the minors with Musketman, that's the reality of it when analysing the type of field that ran yesterday.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by CSC

He finishes a well beaten third in last year's Preakness IMO with the same trip fighting it out for the minors with Musketman, that's the reality of it when analysing the type of field that ran yesterday.

This is almost like complimenting Rachel.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

This is almost like complimenting Rachel.

I guess I am, no doubt she and maybe Mine That Bird ran the better races last year.