7/16 (DEL): Delaware H. (G2), Carpenter Jr. Mem. S., Sussex S.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Don't forget, it's Blind Luck we're talking about. She lives to make races close.

Bullsh!t.

Here she is winning a Grade 1 race by 7:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMU4MgAUVnc


But yeah, when her main competition is evenly matched - or when the pace is snail enough - she lives to make races close and or she gets beat.

[Calzone Lord]

I think Vic blew his load after she crossed the 1/16th pole in that race.

Wonder what he was aiming at?

Zenyatta pic: -120
Azeri pic: +100
Field: +10,000

[Kasept]

106 Beyers for the top pair..

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Bullsh!t.

Here she is winning a Grade 1 race by 7:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMU4MgAUVnc


But yeah, when her main competition is evenly matched - or when the pace is snail enough - she lives to make races close and or she gets beat.

That's just it, she did nothing different in that race than she does every other time, most of the time it works out, sometimes it doesn't, sure fun to watch though.

[TouchOfGrey]

Now THAT was a horse race!

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Bullsh!t.

Here she is winning a Grade 1 race by 7:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMU4MgAUVnc


But yeah, when her main competition is evenly matched - or when the pace is snail enough - she lives to make races close and or she gets beat.

First of all, she was a precocious two year old and badly overmatched most of that field.

More importantly, that was a fast pace in a 2yo race, where the speed all collapsed.

Did at any point in yesterdays race did you think HDG was going to win?

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

First of all, she was a precocious two year old and badly overmatched most of that field.

More importantly, that was a fast pace in a 2yo race, where the speed all collapsed.

Did at any point in yesterdays race did you think HDG was going to win?

Are you still on a crusade to prove that Blind Luck really isn't that good and is no better than Octave?

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Are you still on a crusade to prove that Blind Luck really isn't that good and is no better than Octave?

Crusade?

That's a bit of a stretch for you to say.

My point all along has been that people are now overrating her, nothing more, nothing less.

I still don't see that big a gap between her and Octave though. Sure, Blind Luck has won more G1s, but most likely against lesser competition.

I am 100% certain Blind Luck doesn't win the Kentucky Oaks the year Octave ran 2nd in it.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Crusade?

That's a bit of a stretch for you to say.

My point all along has been that people are now overrating her, nothing more, nothing less.

I still don't see that big a gap between her and Octave though. Sure, Blind Luck has won more G1s, but most likely against lesser competition.

I am 100% certain Blind Luck doesn't win the Kentucky Oaks the year Octave ran 2nd in it.

Seriously, stop with the Octave stuff. Blind Luck is considerably better than Octave, has stretched out her top performances for longer, has many, many more GI wins, has run against better competition on multiple occasions, has won on multiple surfaces all across America. There's really no comparison between the two of them.

Blind Luck has always been a product of the current era in thoroughbred racing. Tell me who the last horse was to be campaigned for two full years straight without a stop that routinely competed at the upper levels? That's what she's done and has run a number of very good races along the way. When it looked like she was tailing off her connections were undeterred and she's come back with two of the best races of her career. People like Blind Luck because her connections have never backed down from a challenge, they've danced every dance, and they've allowed her to be a racehorse.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Seriously, stop with the Octave stuff. Blind Luck is considerably better than Octave, has stretched out her top performances for longer, has many, many more GI wins, has run against better competition on multiple occasions, has won on multiple surfaces all across America. There's really no comparison between the two of them.

Blind Luck has always been a product of the current era in thoroughbred racing. Tell me who the last horse was to be campaigned for two full years straight without a stop that routinely competed at the upper levels? That's what she's done and has run a number of very good races along the way. When it looked like she was tailing off her connections were undeterred and she's come back with two of the best races of her career. People like Blind Luck because her connections have never backed down from a challenge, they've danced every dance, and they've allowed her to be a racehorse.

I've already conceded she's more accomplished than Octave. Part of that, however, is both level of competition, and that she has raced as a 4yo, which I don't think Octave did (I could be wrong).

And yeah, I commend the connections for not being pussies with her!!

I'm even a fan of the filly! I did say when she was a two year old that she was the most likely winner of the Ky Oaks the following year.

Again, my whole point is that people have gotten carried away with how good she really is. My little quip about Octave was meant as a yardstick for comparisons. She is/was a lot closer in ability to Octave than she is/was to Rags to Riches, for instance.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

I've already conceded she's more accomplished than Octave. Part of that, however, is both level of competition, and that she has raced as a 4yo, which I don't think Octave did (I could be wrong).

And yeah, I commend the connections for not being pussies with her!!

I'm even a fan of the filly! I did say when she was a two year old that she was the most likely winner of the Ky Oaks the following year.

Again, my whole point is that people have gotten carried away with how good she really is. My little quip about Octave was meant as a yardstick for comparisons. She is/was a lot closer in ability to Octave than she is/was to Rags to Riches, for instance.

At 2, Octave lost the Astoria to Desire to Excel. It took Desire to Excel until July of the following year to win another race, which ended up being her only other win in a brief career. She lost the Matron to a superstar named Meadow Breeze. Four weeks later Meadow Breeze was beaten over 40 lengths by Sutra in the Frizette. Octave finished 2nd in the BCJF to Dreaming of Anna, who was 0-2 the rest of her career on dirt and never won better than a G3 race on turf.

At 3, Octave lost her seasonal debut to Mistical Plan in the FG Oaks. Mistical Plan never won another race at 2 turns in her career. She lost the Ashland to Christmas Kid, who was 0-5 in the rest of her career with nothing better than a 3rd place finish at any point. She traded decisions with Lady Joanne in the summer then lost the Cotillion to Bear Now, who was 0-6 on dirt through the rest of her career. Octave's competition was largely terrible.

Horses like Rags to Riches and Candy Ride often have very lofty reputations on message boards. Both were terrific horses but are difficult for comparison's sake because the amount of time where they were at their best was so limited. Was the Rags to Riches from February through June of 2007 a great horse? No doubt about it. Did she have individual efforts that were better than anything a horse like Blind Luck has ever run? Yeah, the Belmont was one for the ages. However, what about the half crippled Rags to Riches that showed up in the Gazelle the same year? How about that Blind Luck has been able to now run at a top level for better than two years?

The ability to have a strong campaign year after year is so severely lacking in the modern game. Like I've said before, that's why Blind Luck gets high praise and she deserves every bit of it. Her talent and ability is MUCH closer to Rags to Riches than Octave.