Current TC Spacing Dates Back to 1969

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Point Given was not a horse suited to running on the lead, while Congaree certainly was. Taking a horse out of his preferred running style can lead to worse than normal performances.

You know all of that already though, doncha?




It was the ride on Eddington that I was referring to, sorry for not being more precise there. That was very reminiscent of Forty Niner in the Preakness. Both were ridden to not win their respective races.




Really dude? Watch the race again.




Yeah, it might be a bit of a stretch about him, but he lost all hope with that ride. He should have gotten the jump on Bet Twice and even McCarron said later on that his ride cost Alysheba the race.

Point Given wasn't on the lead in the Derby. He was sitting about 5-6 lengths back. As fast as the pace was, he should have definitely been further back. But as badly as he ran, there is no way anyone can say he should have won. He got beat by 12 lengths. Horses who were closer to the lead beat him and horses who were further back beat him. He didn't even come close to running the best race of anyone in that race. There is no logical way to look at that race and say that he should have won. If a horse is supposed to be laying about 10 lengths back but the jock only has them 5 back and they end up losing by 2 lengths, you can make a good case that the horse might have won with a better ride. But when a horse is a little closer than they should be and the horse gets beat by 12 lengths, I don't know how you could say that horse could have won. I guarantee you Baffert does not think that ride cost him the race.

With regard to Smarty Jones, his trip wasn't that bad. It's not like Eddington was head and head with him. Smarty was pretty much clear and he wasn't going that fast. I admit that Smarty Jones probably could have won the race if he went much much slower and nobody put any pressure on him. But why would you expect that to happen? Considering that Smarty won the Preakness by 10 lengths, it's not shocking that he could have won the Belmont if he got a completely uncontested lead in slow fractions.

I watched Afleet Alex's Ky Derby this afternoon. If every horse I ever bet on in the Derby got that trip I would be thrilled. It was a relatively clean trip. If you have a relatively clean trip in a 20 horse field, it's a good day.

With regard to Alysheba, the guy who was screaming about the ride was Van Berg. Van Berg had supposedly told McCarron before the race that he didn't think there was much speed and that Alysheba could probably go to the lead. I don't know why Van Berg would have thought that Alysheba would be in front of Bet Twice. Bet Twice was ahead of Alysheba in the early going in both the Derby and the Preakness and Alysheba was still able to beat him. Anyway, Van Berg claims the ride in the Belmont cost Alysheba the race. I don't know what he is smoking. He was very critical of McCarron. McCarron was diplomatic about it. He said maybe it was a bad ride. He never said he thought it cost him the race.