Discreet Cat's Beyer was a 115

Originally Posted by ELA

Great post. I also think there is another aspect at play here -- some % of people, whether they be professionals gamblers, bloodstock agents, or whatever they may be, tend to look at horses in different ways. There's almost a type of coginitive dissonance going on here in the background. Some may look at the horse, subconciously and without knowing at all, strictly looking to "beat him" next time. Others may look at it completely differently, perhaps wanting him to be "the horse" that we've all looked for high and low for quite some time. Others, in a different way, perhaps many other ways.

I also think that many people are catching the "potential" bug and that is not only contageous but also an easy target for critisizm.

Eric

Eric I agree, and on this whole thread or any other thread I have yet to see anyone put down this horse or his performance. In fact all have praised it, in varying forms or degrees of excitement.
I was told I was "talking down" to people when I asked if I was the only one who had seen the undercard. Nonsense. I simply couldn't believe the gushing over the raw time and honestly felt like people must not have seen the undercard and realized how fast the track was playing.
That doesn't mean I didn't appreciate the effort, or the horse. But a few folks jumped the gun on the raw time in their excitement over the horse, and I think all times or races have to be viewed in the proper context.
When Bark Dust and Mister Supremo go 7F in 1:21:4 on the same card and track, any references to time, short of a shattering of a track record to me become a small issue.
Different people view races and horses in different ways, exactly as you suggest.
To me, Premium's Tap effort was just as worthy of praise. Running back on short rest off a big race he not only toyed with the field, but did so in a manner that would suggest a huge breakthrough race and that he is really in incredible shape and form. The fact that he didn't tie a track record on a track that wasn't playing that fast doesn't get him as much hype as DC's race did due to the raw time. I'm not saying it was a better effort, but certainly in the same league and was worthy of more hype than it got.
Thor's Echo's race was also awesme and will get a HUGE fig on a track that was playing pretty slow on the undercard.

Originally Posted by oracle80

Eric I agree, and on this whole thread or any other thread I have yet to see anyone put down this horse or his performance. In fact all have praised it, in varying forms or degrees of excitement.
I was told I was "talking down" to people when I asked if I was the only one who had seen the undercard. Nonsense. I simply couldn't believe the gushing over the raw time and honestly felt like people must not have seen the undercard and realized how fast the track was playing.
That doesn't mean I didn't appreciate the effort, or the horse. But a few folks jumped the gun on the raw time in their excitement over the horse, and I think all times or races have to be viewed in the proper context.
When Bark Dust and Mister Supremo go 7F in 1:21:4 on the same card and track, any references to time, short of a shattering of a track record to me become a small issue.
Different people view races and horses in different ways, exactly as you suggest.
To me, Premium's Tap effort was just as worthy of praise. Running back on short rest off a big race he not only toyed with the field, but did so in a manner that would suggest a huge breakthrough race and that he is really in incredible shape and form. The fact that he didn't tie a track record on a track that wasn't playing that fast doesn't get him as much hype as DC's race did due to the raw time. I'm not saying it was a better effort, but certainly in the same league and was worthy of more hype than it got.
Thor's Echo's race was also awesme and will get a HUGE fig on a track that was playing pretty slow on the undercard.

Premium Tap didnt break a track record, but he did break the Stakes record. To me that was pretty good because (as you mentioned) the track was playing so so.

[SentToStud]

I really do wish DC had gone a tick quicker and set a NTR. Why not? I certainly do understand raw times are just that, raw, but still think he ran a super race and looked capable of just a bit more. Thing is, if he had beaten the mark, folks would be all over him as having set a phony track record and that's not right. I'm sure the track was fast for Easy Goer and expect it was also the day Congaree went 133 flat. I don't think DC has done enough to be called a great horse, much less a very good one and wouldn't even if he'd gone faster.

But what he has done, that's kind of getting lost, is that he has made the round-trip from US-->> Dubai-->> US very successfully. It will be very impressive if he can do it again.

What's also lost here is the great job Surroor did with him. I don't think this is the soundest horse ever seen, yet every time he shows up for a race, he looks fantastic.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

I really do wish DC had gone a tick quicker and set a NTR. Why not? I certainly do understand raw times are just that, raw, but still think he ran a super race and looked capable of just a bit more. Thing is, if he had beaten the mark, folks would be all over him as having set a phony track record and that's not right. I'm sure the track was fast for Easy Goer and expect it was also the day Congaree went 133 flat. I don't think DC has done enough to be called a great horse, much less a very good one and wouldn't even if he'd gone faster.

But what he has done, that's kind of getting lost, is that he has made the round-trip from US-->> Dubai-->> US very successfully. It will be very impressive if he can do it again.

What's also lost here is the great job Surroor did with him. I don't think this is the soundest horse ever seen, yet every time he shows up for a race, he looks fantastic.

I agree 100% sent to. fast track or not, what we saw was very special i think. they've done a great job with him. every time they have put him on the track he has been untouchable. he may not be great yet but it's within his grasp with a few more races.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Eric I agree, and on this whole thread or any other thread I have yet to see anyone put down this horse or his performance. In fact all have praised it, in varying forms or degrees of excitement.
I was told I was "talking down" to people when I asked if I was the only one who had seen the undercard. Nonsense. I simply couldn't believe the gushing over the raw time and honestly felt like people must not have seen the undercard and realized how fast the track was playing.
That doesn't mean I didn't appreciate the effort, or the horse. But a few folks jumped the gun on the raw time in their excitement over the horse, and I think all times or races have to be viewed in the proper context.
When Bark Dust and Mister Supremo go 7F in 1:21:4 on the same card and track, any references to time, short of a shattering of a track record to me become a small issue.
Different people view races and horses in different ways, exactly as you suggest.
To me, Premium's Tap effort was just as worthy of praise. Running back on short rest off a big race he not only toyed with the field, but did so in a manner that would suggest a huge breakthrough race and that he is really in incredible shape and form. The fact that he didn't tie a track record on a track that wasn't playing that fast doesn't get him as much hype as DC's race did due to the raw time. I'm not saying it was a better effort, but certainly in the same league and was worthy of more hype than it got.
Thor's Echo's race was also awesme and will get a HUGE fig on a track that was playing pretty slow on the undercard.

But Thor's Echo sucks, he only raced 3 lengths off the rail in the BC. He couldn't have won otherwise! It was the rail, damn it! I demand a recount!

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by philcski

But Thor's Echo sucks, he only raced 3 lengths off the rail in the BC. He couldn't have won otherwise! It was the rail, damn it! I demand a recount!

Yes, Phil, and don't forget that Thor's Echo actually bounced in the BC. It was only the (very wide) rail bias that, like a luge run, rocketed him to that win, overcoming not only the other "better" horses, but the inevitable bounce, too. ;>)

--Dunbar

[Linny]

As a fan, there are certain horses I like or follow more closely than others. Some are top stakes horses, others are the Spooky Mulders of the world. Fans tend to get very emotional, defensive and almost irrational about their favorites.
on the other hand, I work in the industry and handicap almost daily. I do everthing from $8k maiden claimers at PHA to the Classic and cannot let emotion decide where I go. Blackthroatedwind makes a lot of great points. We are so desperate for a good one to come along that we crown superstars before their time.
I was impressed with DC on Sat, he looked very good. However, I think it's fair to say that when Go Fernando Go (who??!!) wins a NYB NW1x in 1:22.22 and 2yo maidens fo 1:36.65 and Bark Dust (who indeed??!!!) goes 1:21.83 we can guess that the track is "sharp." I like Nobiz but since 1986 only 3 horses have won the Remsen in under 1:50 (Rockport Harbor and Comeonmom) so I think it's fair to assume that his final time of 1:48.82 was "assisted" by the surface condidion.

Originally Posted by Linny

As a fan, there are certain horses I like or follow more closely than others. Some are top stakes horses, others are the Spooky Mulders of the world. Fans tend to get very emotional, defensive and almost irrational about their favorites.
on the other hand, I work in the industry and handicap almost daily. I do everthing from $8k maiden claimers at PHA to the Classic and cannot let emotion decide where I go. Blackthroatedwind makes a lot of great points. We are so desperate for a good one to come along that we crown superstars before their time.
I was impressed with DC on Sat, he looked very good. However, I think it's fair to say that when Go Fernando Go (who??!!) wins a NYB NW1x in 1:22.22 and 2yo maidens fo 1:36.65 and Bark Dust (who indeed??!!!) goes 1:21.83 we can guess that the track is "sharp." I like Nobiz but since 1986 only 3 horses have won the Remsen in under 1:50 (Rockport Harbor and Comeonmom) so I think it's fair to assume that his final time of 1:48.82 was "assisted" by the surface condidion.

I'm a little offended here, I made those points and got accused of being a hater on Saturday night.
Bark Dust's time had me talking to myself, imagine singling him on the back end of a pik-3 against a bad field of allowance horses in a 5 1/2f race at the Meadowlands and getting beat by a Charles Town shipper and then tossing him out of pik-3's based on that dreadful no excuse performance and watching him wire a field in 1:21:4? That triggered a profanity fest that had to be heard to be truly appreciated.

[Linny]

I guess that since I'm widely known in cyberspace as a "hater" that it's simply redundant to call me out on it here. On any racing board, anyplace on Earth if you apply logic you are by definition a hater. Logic may be used (but only with caution) on the "handicapping/selections" page of this and other boards.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Linny

I guess that since I'm widely known in cyberspace as a "hater" that it's simply redundant to call me out on it here. On any racing board, anyplace on Earth if you apply logic you are by definition a hater. Logic may be used (but only with caution) on the "handicapping/selections" page of this and other boards.

I've noticed the same thing, LOGIC = HATER.

Or if I express an opinion that I don't believe a certain horse is quite as good as he is being built up to be, that gets somehow translated to mean I think said horse is a "Rat" or a "Pig". Huh?

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

I've noticed the same thing, LOGIC = HATER.

Or if I express an opinion that I don't believe a certain horse is quite as good as he is being built up to be, that gets somehow translated to mean I think said horse is a "Rat" or a "Pig". Huh?

Jim I'm gonna take a guess that you are over 30.
Part of the problem I have with conversing about the context of how good a horse is or may be with anyone under 30 these days is that they lack the perspective that we have. Its certainly not their fault that they were watching Sesame Street when we were watching races in the 80's(thats as far back as I go) and early 90's.
Its just that all these very small fields in dirt gade ones most of the time have rendered "races" into the "performances" category as Steve so aptly described them.
We don't get SS-EG battles or big fields like we used to get and matchups throughout the year. Some of the younger folks in the crowd may find this hard to believe, but horses used to meet each other more than once a year at the highest level and the fields were larger and that meant traffic trouble and obstacles to overcome. I kinda laugh when I talk to some these days who tell me what an awful trip a horse had because he had to steady one time, or that "the jockey moved too soon, or too late".
I suppose with the small fields you get in the big ones now that steadying one time or a slighty premature move may indeed seem like a tragedy. But in the good ole days horses most often had to overcome trips and traffic in races and it made winning consistently at the highest level a very hard task. If you didn't get beat because one of the other good ones you met 2-4 times a year was better that day, you could get beat because of traffic.
Winning streaks used to really define a grade one horse as very good, now they play dodgeball all year and a bad trip is steadying one time or not getting the exact setup you needed during a race.
There's no way to get someone younger to get the perspective that someone older has from remembering racing as it once was. They can read about it all they want, but just reading about something rather than actually experiencing it won't ususally give someone the perspective.
And so it goes and will continue to go. The only perspective that younger fans have is that of which they know, and over recent years thats meant more long winning streaks in small fields where main rivals duck each other all year long. To older fans, its gonna be hard for most of todays proclaimed "superhorses" to come close to measuring up to the days of yesterday.
Its not gonna change, and I expect the conflict over how good these horses are to continue for quite some time. It will continue until the last of the racing fans who remembers racing before the Breeders Cup took over as the pinnacle of the racing year dies off.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Jim I'm gonna take a guess that you are over 30.
Part of the problem I have with conversing about the context of how good a horse is or may be with anyone under 30 these days is that they lack the perspective that we have. Its certainly not their fault that they were watching Sesame Street when we were watching races in the 80's(thats as far back as I go) and early 90's.
Its just that all these very small fields in dirt gade ones most of the time have rendered "races" into the "performances" category as Steve so aptly described them.
We don't get SS-EG battles or big fields like we used to get and matchups throughout the year. Some of the younger folks in the crowd may find this hard to believe, but horses used to meet each other more than once a year at the highest level and the fields were larger and that meant traffic trouble and obstacles to overcome. I kinda laugh when I talk to some these days who tell me what an awful trip a horse had because he had to steady one time, or that "the jockey moved too soon, or too late".
I suppose with the small fields you get in the big ones now that steadying one time or a slighty premature move may indeed seem like a tragedy. But in the good ole days horses most often had to overcome trips and traffic in races and it made winning consistently at the highest level a very hard task. If you didn't get beat because one of the other good ones you met 2-4 times a year was better that day, you could get beat because of traffic.
Winning streaks used to really define a grade one horse as very good, now they play dodgeball all year and a bad trip is steadying one time or not getting the exact setup you needed during a race.
There's no way to get someone younger to get the perspective that someone older has from remembering racing as it once was. They can read about it all they want, but just reading about something rather than actually experiencing it won't ususally give someone the perspective.
And so it goes and will continue to go. The only perspective that younger fans have is that of which they know, and over recent years thats meant more long winning streaks in small fields where main rivals duck each other all year long. To older fans, its gonna be hard for most of todays proclaimed "superhorses" to come close to measuring up to the days of yesterday.
Its not gonna change, and I expect the conflict over how good these horses are to continue for quite some time. It will continue until the last of the racing fans who remembers racing before the Breeders Cup took over as the pinnacle of the racing year dies off.

Uh yeah, over thirty, BARELY. <cough, cough>

your comments are right on and funny. I agree, the times required the horses to have a real hard-knocking quality back then.

Thats why I respect the campaign that they have taken with Ouija Board this year. She has danced all the tough dances not ducking anyone male or female, and traveled the world the as well. To me, to some extent, she is kinda emblematic of racings past. Have they ever used an excuse for her?