8/1 (MTH): Haskell (G1), Oceanport & Matchmaker (G3's)

[westcoastinvader]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Was this really an epidemic 5 months ago here?

Not so sure, but don't let that stop you.

I'll offer a 2nd opinion that it was.

I believe there were many posters referring to him regularly as "Looking at Sucky."


Now he's won The Preakness and The Haskell.

As did Rachel Alexandra to cement her Super Star status.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by westcoastinvader

I'll offer a 2nd opinion that it was.

I believe there were many posters referring to him regularly as "Looking at Sucky."


Now he's won The Preakness and The Haskell.

As did Rachel Alexandra to cement her Super Star status.

Apparently you missed the KY Oaks last year. Oh and that Woodward thing to.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by westcoastinvader

I'll offer a 2nd opinion that it was.

I believe there were many posters referring to him regularly as "Looking at Sucky."


Now he's won The Preakness and The Haskell.

As did Rachel Alexandra to cement her Super Star status.

Well I still think he's mediocre... but the best of the crop, which says a lot about the other 3yo's.

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I'll bet it's higher. I think they'll give him something in the 105-109 range.

See Drugs' post. If they don't split the variant (and they shouldn't), he gets the same figure as Omnisicent, whose previous career top was a 94 (last out). I do think he improved off that race- but not more than 4-5 lengths.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by philcski

Well I still think he's mediocre... but the best of the crop, which says a lot about the other 3yo's.

I think Eskanderya was miles the best of this sad pitiful crop.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I think Eskanderya was miles the best of this sad pitiful crop.

Forgot about him. Agree.

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

44-for-157 isn't 42%, it's 28%.

Since when?!?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by philcski

Forgot about him. Agree.



Since when?!?

when i do the math, it's 28.

[CSC]

That's ironic this is what I said to Indian Charlie in a post earlier in the day...I'll never be misconstrued with Issac Newton or Pythagoras, good to see I am not alone here. But come on guys and gals it's simple division

[Danzig]

i rounded in my head and came up with roughly one quarter...160 divided by 40...so no way 157 and 44 can be almost half.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Danzig

when i do the math, it's 28.

Pretty sure Phil was being sarcastic. It's 28%, which is about average for a jockey riding for a powerhouse barn like Baffert's.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Pretty sure Phil was being sarcastic. It's 28%, which is about average for a jockey riding for a powerhouse barn like Baffert's.

could be.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Pretty sure Phil was being sarcastic. It's 28%, which is about average for a jockey riding for a powerhouse barn like Baffert's.

Yes - Rupert obviously got the 42% stuck in his head when I told him that about 42% of Martin Garcia's total wins this year have come for Baffert and 58% for other trainers not named Baffert.

Having first dibs in the Baffert barn is huge.

In 2009, when Baffert and Gomez teamed up - their record was 95-41-19-9 - for a 43.2% win percentage and a $2.38 ROI.

Gomez is a different type of rider than Garcia ... he'll save ground and every once in a while one will get trapped or stopped. Garcia will put them in a position so that if the horse is 2 lengths the best - he'll win by a half length - but he very rarely gets stopped.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Pretty sure Phil was being sarcastic. It's 28%, which is about average for a jockey riding for a powerhouse barn like Baffert's.

what I gathered was it would have been 42% of his total wins on the year, which seems to be correct. 44/105