Blind Luck

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

OMG please dont start, she has not lost anything. She will take Blame apart. She gets beat if she gets a bad trip, and thats possible with Mike Smith, or if a horse like Quality Road freaks out on the front end... I am to the point where, I was always a fan of Z and Rachel, I just thought Z was better, but now I am starting to hate everyone else and praying Z just wipes them all out so everyone can STFU.

But that's the lesson that Blind Luck teaches us. Even a superior against-the-grain runner like BL has lost. In particular, she's lost on POLY, where it's a lot harder to go against the grain. And she's 4 for 4 on dirt where it's MUCH EASIER to do so. Hard to believe that those that appreciate what BL does can't make the next step and REALLY APPRECIATE what Z does. Z would CRUSH her on POLY -- and certainly on dirt --- with comparable setups/trips. As much as has been made about Z's last race, BL doesn't win with that setup. Has Z lost a step? Who knows? Just give her clear sailing and (reasonably) enough time and she'll run ANYTHING down.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

But that's the lesson that Blind Luck teaches us. Even a superior against-the-grain runner like BL has lost. In particular, she's lost on POLY, where it's a lot harder to go against the grain. And she's 4 for 4 on dirt where it's MUCH EASIER to do so. Hard to believe that those that appreciate what BL does can't make the next step and REALLY APPRECIATE what Z does. Z would CRUSH her on POLY -- and certainly on dirt --- with comparable setups/trips. As much as has been made about Z's last race, BL doesn't win with that setup. Has Z lost a step? Who knows? Just give her clear sailing and (reasonably) enough time and she'll run ANYTHING down.

On what planet is it easier to overcome a slow pace on dirt than on synthetic?

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

On what planet is it easier to overcome a slow pace on dirt than on synthetic?

On the same planet where, to here the intelligencia on it, jocks INTENTIONALLY slow their horses down early so they can make a late run.

Think about how many 'mediocre' poly horses do well on dirt; then consider the opposite.

P.S. the set of PACE (slow or fast) is a SUBSET of the setup set. Thinking of races only in terms of PACE means that you're not considering ALL the possible cases.

[ateamstupid]

A horse who's last behind a slow pace on synthetic is in much better shape than one who's last behind a slow pace on dirt. And a loose leader is far more dangerous on dirt than on synthetic. Synthetic has many of the same pace-neutralizing attributes that turf does. I'm not really sure how you can dispute that.

Most 'poly' horses who do well on dirt are types with tactical speed which is rendered useless on the 'level playing field' of synthetic. Hardly ever to we see deep closers run better on dirt than on synthetic.

[the_fat_man]

I think that there are some synthetic generalizations that just aren't supported anymore. Last year, I argued that WO was a very fair track, in the sense that closers weren't penalized by slow paces (or minimal move races) and it was very difficult for speed to wire. This hasn't been the case as much this year, where speed seems to have as good a chance as closers. And, certainly, HOL and SA aren't exactly more favorable to late runners than they are to speed.

I think where confusion comes into to play is when we group UNFAIR (speed favoring) dirt tracks in with dirt tracks in general. Clearly, CRC, TAM, FG, even CD, among others, are as, if not more, favorable to closers than they are to front runners. And, when these tracks get wet, while speed holds on the speed favoring dirt tracks, races are much more prone to collapse on fair ones. As a result, there are, as best as I can determine, significantly more wipeouts on dirt, in particular OFF dirt tracks, than there are on poly and turf, where, additionally, and certainly beyond argument, you have much smaller gaps between the fields at the finish.

Horses that run a high number of wipeouts in relation to their overall races, like Z, and BL, to a much smaller extent, do so more easily on dirt because horses are more prone to come back on dirt, fair dirt, that is, than they are on poly, where they're much more bunched during the running of the race, and at the finish.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

A horse who's last behind a slow pace on synthetic is in much better shape than one who's last behind a slow pace on dirt. And a loose leader is far more dangerous on dirt than on synthetic. Synthetic has many of the same pace-neutralizing attributes that turf does. I'm not really sure how you can dispute that.

Most 'poly' horses who do well on dirt are types with tactical speed which is rendered useless on the 'level playing field' of synthetic. Hardly ever to we see deep closers run better on dirt than on synthetic.

I think it all depends on the circumstances (who is in the race and the way the track is playing). There are plenty of times when a deep closer in a race with no pace is better off on dirt than synthetic or grass.

If you're a deep closer on synthetic or grass, there is no way you're going to be able to win one of those races where the front runners sprint home and run their final 1/8th of a mile in under 11 seconds. You see that sometimes on synthetic and grass. That's never going to happen on the dirt. You'll never see the final 1/8th of a mile run in :10 3/5 on the dirt, yet you see that sometimes on synthetic and grass. On the dirt, the front runners will almost never break 12 seconds for the final 1/8th.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I think it all depends on the circumstances (who is in the race and the way the track is playing). There are plenty of times when a deep closer in a race with no pace is better off on dirt than synthetic or grass.

If you're a deep closer on synthetic or grass, there is no way you're going to be able to win one of those races where the front runners sprint home and run their final 1/8th of a mile in under 11 seconds. You see that sometimes on synthetic and grass. That's never going to happen on the dirt. You'll never see the final 1/8th of a mile run in :10 3/5 on the dirt, yet you see that sometimes on synthetic and grass. On the dirt, the front runners will almost never break 12 seconds for the final 1/8th.

This may be true, but by the same token, closers can run final 3/8 way quicker on synthetic than they can on dirt. The nature of synthetic racing rewards turn of foot rather than consistent tactical speed. Obviously there are exceptions to this rule, but that's generally the case.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

This may be true, but by the same token, closers can run final 3/8 way quicker on synthetic than they can on dirt. The nature of synthetic racing rewards turn of foot rather than consistent tactical speed. Obviously there are exceptions to this rule, but that's generally the case.

I agree that turn of foot is obviously much more important on grass and synthetic than dirt. They sometimes will sprint home that final quarter of a mile in both grass and synthetic racing. You don't see that on dirt.

There are days on synthetic tracks where having an easy lead in slow fractions isn't even an advantage. That first meet with syntetic at Del Mar, you would tehm run the half in :51 and a horse would win from dead-last. It didn't make any sense. All conventional wisdom was thrown out the window the way that track was playing that meet.

But I think it's tough to generalize because not all syntetic tracks play the same and not all dirt tracks play the same. Even one track will play different from day to day. I've seen days at Saratoga over the years when there is a fairly big speed-bias and I've seen other days there where there is an anti-speed bias.

When it comes to Zenyatta, I actually think she is much more vulnerable on synthetic than dirt when she's running against weak competiton. She's had a few races that she barely won where the horses in front of her were sprinting home and they were hard to catch. I don't think Z would have that problem against those types of horses on dirt.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

But that's the lesson that Blind Luck teaches us. Even a superior against-the-grain runner like BL has lost. In particular, she's lost on POLY, where it's a lot harder to go against the grain. And she's 4 for 4 on dirt where it's MUCH EASIER to do so. Hard to believe that those that appreciate what BL does can't make the next step and REALLY APPRECIATE what Z does. Z would CRUSH her on POLY -- and certainly on dirt --- with comparable setups/trips. As much as has been made about Z's last race, BL doesn't win with that setup. Has Z lost a step? Who knows? Just give her clear sailing and (reasonably) enough time and she'll run ANYTHING down.

I would disagree as you know. On dirt, Z's total lack of early speed is going to be a detriment on dirt. Blind Luck, while a similar style, is able to maintain closer contact in my opinion on dirt. That very attribute is what caused her to lose a few times on rubber.

You can pretend the surfaces are the same all you want, it just isn't so.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I would disagree as you know. On dirt, Z's total lack of early speed is going to be a detriment on dirt. Blind Luck, while a similar style, is able to maintain closer contact in my opinion on dirt. That very attribute is what caused her to lose a few times on rubber.

You can pretend the surfaces are the same all you want, it just isn't so.

I don't think that BL maintains any closer contact in her races than Z does. What both can do, that Biofuel, another poly runner with a similar style can't, or, at least, hasn't shown the ability to do so up to this point, is run without needing 'escorts'. Biofuel got terrible trips in her two races against DMC, as she had to do all her own running. She was able to win over the weekend at WO because others ran before she did and she picked up the pieces -- albeit with a very nice late run.

But not being 'escorted' is pretty much never a problem on dirt in races with a reasonably large field, on a fair track, which the Classic will be. Z has 2 races on dirt, both with good setups, and both HUGE wipeouts. BL's best race (in terms of figures and visual impressiveness) was a similarly well setup wipeout. Once again, IMO, BL, while very impressive, hasn't shown the kind of late kick that Z exhibits, nor the ability to overcome 'as difficult' setups. In other words, Z needs to be 'escorted' significantly less than BL. Z just pushes a bigger gear --- bigger than any horse out there. She'd bury BL if they were to come home together.

[King Glorious]

I also really appreciate a guy like Hollendorfer. He's not afraid of those big, bad, scary Rockies and keeps shipping her over them to run. You've got to appreciate the fact that the Cotillion is next on her schedule, even though the risk/reward is completely out of her favor. With Devil May Care also possibly being there, Blind Luck HAS to beat her again in order to maintain her position at the top of the 3yo filly leaderboard. If DMC were to win, even though they'd be tied, I guarantee that she'd become the new leader. It's like in college football. Ohio St. can beat Michigan 31-0 and win the Big 10 title but if they finish 1-2 in the polls and meet in the national title game and Michigan wins 21-20, they are the champion. Call it what have you done for me lately. Plus, and let's be honest, there is an eastern bias when it comes to the Eclipse Awards. So with very little to gain and much to lose, I give a lot of respect to Hollendorfer and hope Blind Luck is rewards him for his decisions. He could easily sit at home or look for an easier spot somewhere else. Then, for good measure, after this he plans on shipping again for the Distaff. I wish he'd bring a glass of Northern California water down to Southern Cal and let John Shirreffs drink from it. It must contain high levels of courage.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

But that's the lesson that Blind Luck teaches us. Even a superior against-the-grain runner like BL has lost. In particular, she's lost on POLY, where it's a lot harder to go against the grain. And she's 4 for 4 on dirt where it's MUCH EASIER to do so. Hard to believe that those that appreciate what BL does can't make the next step and REALLY APPRECIATE what Z does. Z would CRUSH her on POLY -- and certainly on dirt --- with comparable setups/trips. As much as has been made about Z's last race, BL doesn't win with that setup. Has Z lost a step? Who knows? Just give her clear sailing and (reasonably) enough time and she'll run ANYTHING down.

She ain't lost anything. She likes to tease the haterz. If there's ever been a horse that likes to fk with people's heads, it's her. She'll run whatever figure needs to be run. She's got to beat Blame, and it won't be easy to beat the Baffert Superjuice. Once that fkn lil M Garcia makes a lead with a horse, it becomes very difficult to get to them. The amount of speed in the race will be very important. If the Baffert juice rates off a mild pace, and gets 1st run, then it's gunna be hard to run them down. He ain't playing. K, that fkr would do anything to see that blonde jump up n' down after winning the biggest race in the world(n' bounce titties.) He's shown he can beat that supertesting.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

She ain't lost anything. She likes to tease the haterz. If there's ever been a horse that likes to fk with people's heads, it's her. She'll run whatever figure needs to be run. She's got to beat Blame, and it won't be easy to beat the Baffert Superjuice. Once that fkn lil M Garcia makes a lead with a horse, it becomes very difficult to get to them. The amount of speed in the race will be very important. If the Baffert juice rates off a mild pace, and gets 1st run, then it's gunna be hard to run them down. He ain't playing. K, that fkr would do anything to see that blonde jump up n' down after winning the biggest race in the worlld(n' bounce titties.) He's shown he can beat that supertesting.

All that's missing is a hiccup.

[Smooth Operator]

LOL … too funny, Scuds

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

All that's missing is a hiccup.

Was at Anita last Saturday. Looked up at the monitor, and there's Black Tongue. You were saying something about how you were gunna be wearing a dunce cap the next day.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

All that's missing is a hiccup.

THAT is funny. Well done.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

You do realize this is an industry that seems to not be bothered by a very successful retired jockey still using commercials that heavily use a beloved dead trainer. It's an industry that welcomes catheter commercials being run on major horse racing networks. It's an industry that was surely gunna embrace this next guy (if he'd only lived a bit longer.) It was inevitable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RyYcDh2EMY&NR=1

www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtYdDK1uTDI