|
|
 |
|
#3
07-30-2006, 03:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
I have a totally different take on it. I don't think Angara is nearly the same filly that she used to be. she doesn't move nearly as well as she used to coming down the stretch. I thought she was a very good filly at one time last year, but Biancone pretty much ran her into the ground by running her way too much. I think the race today ended up playing very weak. I don't think anybody ran well. I don't think Angara ran anything close to her best today. She beat Argentina by a nose. Argentina hasn't run a good race in this country. she is now 0 for 5 in this country. If a filly like Shining Energy(at her best) was in that race today, I think she would have won by open lengths.
|
|
#4
07-30-2006, 04:55 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
She made a lot of money last year, where do you fault Biancone for his management of her?
|
|
#5
07-30-2006, 05:04 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
What? I don't think its cycle or being run into the ground or that the horse is the best. If you listened to the trainer and as we all know the horse likes a soft surface much much better. When its soft, the horse runs its best race. Otherwise, it doesn't. What else do you need to know?
__________________
Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things.
|
|
#6
07-30-2006, 07:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I'm a huge Shining Energy fan, but a win by Angara today proofs that she still has it. I love it when a horse like her guts out a win like that. Too many horses give it up, like Lady of Venice did today. Horses that know where the finish line is and do everything in their power to get there first are the types of horses I love to see run.
|
|
#7
07-30-2006, 07:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Last edited by jpops757 : 07-30-2006 at 07:57 AM.
|
|
#8
07-30-2006, 08:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
She is great on a soft going, that doesn't make her great though. She is far from Ouija Board.
|
|
#10
07-30-2006, 10:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#11
07-30-2006, 12:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
He's actually been doing the opposite with Lady of Venice. He only runs her once every 2 months. I couldn't figure out if he was being conservative or if there is something wrong with her. It's not his style to be that conservative.
|
|
#12
07-30-2006, 12:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#14
07-30-2006, 01:24 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Do you know if Angara was hurting, or sore? Maybe she was in good shape and the races didn't take much out of her. Some horses can run numerous times in a preparation and be fine, unless you were there with Angara and Biancone, how would you know?
|
|
#15
07-30-2006, 02:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some horses can run numerous times in a preparation and be fine, unless you were there with Angara and Biancone, how would you know?[/quote]
From now on, I will only give my opinion on horses that I own and that I am there with. You can do the same thing. This board may get a little boring but that's alright. LOL.
|
|
#16
07-30-2006, 02:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I do know that right now in this country, horses don't last or stay in form if you run them every 2-3 weeks. I wouldn't run a claiming horse every 2-3 weeks, let alone a stakes horse. Why do you think that the good horses only run about 6 times a year or so? If they could run these horses every 2-3 weeks and get 15 races a year out of them, they would do it. It's not like trainers are the most altruistic guys in the world. It's actually the opposite. Most trainers are pretty greedy. Some horses are obviously more fragile than others. You don't treat every horse the same way, but there is no horse that I would run every 2-3 weeks. I think all the top trainers would agree with me. You don't see Pletcher or Frankel running their horses every 2-3 weeks. I think running Angara every 2-3 weeks definitely took its toll on her. Her last few races of the year were not good.
|
|
#17
07-30-2006, 03:07 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I respect your opinion that Angara's campaign might have taken its toll on her. But I felt that some races just didn't "set up" for her and/or she cycled out of form last year. The thought of Biancone "running her into the ground" never entered my mind and I wondered why you stated that unless you knew she was broken down after last year or something. I would prefer that horses run every 14-21 days in a campaign and then get a lay up. It seems to me that this is impossible due to our year long racing season in America, and maybe that is why trainers space the races out so much. Another opinion I have on the long layoffs between races with "good horses" is the fear of losing due to an impact later in a career at stud. Maybe the owners of really nice horses don't want them having blips on their record if they can help it now due to the current breeding market. I could be way off on that though, let me know your opinion of this one Richi.. If you had a really nice colt who had won 3 out of 3 and looked to be pretty tough, would you fret about him losing a race/races due to the impact on his stud fee at a later date. Let me clarify that I wasn't trying to offend you with my Angara statements, it just never entered my mind that Biancone was abusing her last year and I didn't understand why you thought that. I think he was just maximizing her profit margin with all of the checks she picked up, and I don't think she will earn as much this year..even with the G1 yesterday.
|
|
#18
07-30-2006, 05:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Once in a great while you will see a freak like Smarty Jones who is an absolute "iron horse" who can take punishment than most horses. He kept running every three weeks and then even ran on two weeks rest in the Preakness. But even Smarty Jones had a limit. After the Preakness, he didn't look like the same horse. Coming back in two weeks was the last straw. He was knocked out. I got to watch him train in the morning because of shows like "The Works" and the other networks that would briefly show him galloping in the morning. He looked so sharp Derby week and Preakess week too. But after the Preakness, he didn't look the same. He wasn't nearly as sharp in the mornings. He didn't have the same intensity. He was tired. The connections of Bernardini were very smart. If they would have run him in the Belmont, there is a very good chance it would have completely ruined him and he would have never been the same. It was tough enough stepping up to a 1 3/16 race coming out of a one mile race on only 3 weeks rest. If they would have brought him back in 3 weeks again to run 1 1/2 miles in the Belmont, he would have been finished. Regarding your question about whether owners run their horses less because of a fear of losng, that's not really how I would categorize it. If you have a valuable horse, you obviously do need to consider which races would optimize your horse's value the most for breeding. A horse is going to have the greatest value, if they win some big races. So if you have a really good horse, you are going to point to the big races. You want to come into the big races at 100% and most trainers know that a horse is more likely to be 100% if he has plenty of rest between races. If you're pointing to a really big race like the BC Classic, you want him to peak for that race. For a 1 1/4 mile race like that, you don't want to come in off too long of a layoff or you might not be fit enough. On the other hand, you don't want the race to be your 3rd race in 6 weeks either. I think that most good trainers feel that 5 weeks between races is pretty ideal. If you have to ship somewhere, then you may need more time. For example, if we ship a horse all the way to Kentucky for a race and the horse runs a hard race, we're probably going to give him at least 6 weeks off if not more. Oracle is a guy that totally understands how important it is to give horses plenty of time between races. What's funny is that me and Oracle handicap totally differently. He uses the sheets and I don't use any type of speed figures. However, after years of observation, we have both come up with the same conclusion: Horses need plenty of time between races and if you don't give them enough time, they will not stay in form for very long and they will not stay sound for very long.
|
|
#19
07-30-2006, 06:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Scroll down on this link and look at the year by year campaigns of Makybe Diva.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makybe_Diva The last one ending November 1st, 2005. So this isn't stuff that happens in the past, it just happened less than 9 months ago. So in her last campaign (as a 7 year old) she begins her season with a little stakes race at 7 furlongs on August 27th at Caulfield. WON Next race is September 10th in a stakes at a mile, she gets second by a nose. Next race is October 1st at 1 1/4 miles, she wins. Now, 21 days later on October 22nd she wins The Cox Plate (Group I) 10 days after that win at a little over 1 1/4 miles, she wins the Melbourne Cup at 2 miles. So in 10 weeks and three days, she won 4 races and placed in one all against top company for each division from 7 furlongs up to 2 miles. This was her lightest campaign of her career, 5 races in 10 weeks. This type of schedule isn't unusual at all in Australia, no matter what class the horse is. And the thoroughbred breed isn't any different over there than it is here as most of the sires are originally from America. So I don't believe that horses in general regardless of class need that much time. While Makybe Diva was a champion, she obviously wasn't "ruined" by her succession of 11 race campaigns in a shorter time than Angara from last year. And she didn't fare as well in the longer campaigns but got 5 good wins out of those 22 starts....really good wins. How do you feel about these types of campaigns for a horse? Do you not think that the American horses could do it? And if not, why?
|
|
#20
07-30-2006, 09:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
With regards to racing in this country, I don't think that horses over here can do it. If they could do it, you would see them doing it. It's extremely rare out here for horses to stay sound and hold their form if you run them too often. Not only do I see this with horses that I am involved with, but I see it with everyday handicapping. If I'm handicapping a race for tomorrow, I will automatically throw out any horse if they've already run 9 times this year. I'm looking for a fresh or at least a relatively fresh horse that's going to run a big race. If a horse already has 9 races this year, I know it's very unlikely that he's going to peak tomorrow. I can't even tell you how many times I will be looking at the Racing Form and see a horse who had to take a long vacation because his trainer rushed him. For example, you will often see a horse that wins first-time out and then the trainer runs him back in 17 days or something like that. You will often see horses take a year off after the trainer does something like that. Horses are more susceptible to injury if you run them when they are tired. In addition, the horses rarely win when they come back so soon. On the other hand, if a trainer gives a horse 26-30 days after winning first-time out, then the horse has a much better chance of winning their 2nd race. Not only that, they have a much better chance of staying sound. That was one of the first things I noticed when I first started going to the track back in the early 1980s. I would see a horse break his maiden very impressively first-time out and these horses would rarely come back and win if they weren't given at least 25 days to recover. Even really good horses would usually get beat if they were brought back in 17 days. If they are stretching out, they need even more time. For example, if a horse wins first-time out going 6 furlongs, they have practically no shot if they come back in a 1 1/16 mile race 21 days later. They usually need time to get one or two 7 furlong works in the horse and maybe even a mile work. If I was going to stretch a horse out to a 1 1/16 mile allowance race off a 6 furlong win first-time out, I would probably give the horse about 6 weeks in between races. I'm no sure exactly why horses seem to need more time between races in the US compared to overseas. My guess is that it's because the races are run so much differently over here. In Europe, they usually only gallop for 75% of the race and they sprint home. They train them a lot differently over there too. In the US, they are training on the dirt and working out pretty fast. In the races over here, they often times run hard for practically the whole race. Last edited by Rupert Pupkin : 07-30-2006 at 09:24 PM.
|
Linear Mode
