Shared Belief

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I think he was at least a couple lengths better at Santa Anita than other tracks.

Except when he wasn't.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Except when he wasn't.

He also might have been just putting it all together during the Winter/Spring meet.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

He also might have been just putting it all together during the Winter/Spring meet.

Yup....the main reason his post was not particularly clever.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

He also might have been just putting it all together during the Winter/Spring meet.

I agree that CC was getting really good in the winter/spring. But were his races at Churchill and Pimlico as good as his races at Santa Anita? You can look at it a few ways. On the one hand, you could say that his races were just as good if not better in the TC races because he faced much better horses. But did he really? Even if there were some decent horses in the Derby and Preakness, did any of them fire? Commanding Curve and Ride on Curlin were the horses that ran 2nd. CC only won those races by 1 1/2- 2 lengths. I would argue that with identical race dynamics, CC can beat Commanding Curve and Ride on Curlin by bigger margins at Santa Anita.

And if you want to look at speed figures, CC ran faster at SA than he did at CD or Pimlico.