Georgie Boy
 

I hope they send this horse to Oaklawn next and run on the dirt(Per the post race interview yesterday, it is either Oaklawn or the SA Derby). If he does well he could end up your Derby favorite.

Now, this is a horse to get excited about... closer to the pace going two turns and when asked.....took off like a rocket, again! Would take his running style over WP anyday running in the Kentucky Derby. Great story here! :)

Plus he's a gelding, so he won't be rushed off to the breeding shed. But he still has alot to prove.

Yes, very interesting horse, and trained great up to the San Felipe:

03/08/2008-HOLLYWOOD PARK-Five Furlongs-All Weather Track Fast-1.00:40 Breezing
03/01/2008-HOLLYWOOD PARK-Seven Furlongs-All Weather Track Fast-1.23:60 Handily
02/23/2008-HOLLYWOOD PARK-Five Furlongs-All Weather Track Fast-59:40 Handily

Just hoping he won't peak too soon. I'd like to see him take a step back for the next few weeks and then a prep that's not too demanding. I'd be happy if he comes into the Derby off a good effort somewhere, not necessarily a winning effort, and isn't the Derby favorite.

There is another thread about Georgie Boy and Gayego called Input on the main forum too...

Georgie Boy has his work cut out for him if he stays west for the SA Derby. He might be the best horse out in Cali, but he still has to go up against the Colonel, El Gato Malo, and an improving Gayego if he stays out there. I give the nod to the Colonel right now.

Georgie Boy = Mister Frisky

And at this time of the year it was:

Mister Frisky = Bold Forbes

So, he should stay in Cali or go to PR?

But he was undefeated going into the Derby :D

if Pyro stubs his toe in his next start....the Derby will have the betting odds of a 35k on the grass at Belmont :eek: the favorite 4-1.
Not that it would be a bad thing.

You guys are, once again, making the mistake of trying to transfer something that happened on synthetic over to a dirt track. It will cost you money.

First, consider that the pace of the race yesterday was very slow, even by synthetic track standards. By dirt standards, it was slower than erosion.

If that race were run on a dirt track, a few things could happen. First, GB could run the same pace and be eight lengths further back of what would be a slow pace. Good luck with that one. Second, he could run 8 lengths faster to try to be up with that slow dirt pace. If he does that, what happens to his finish? Third, he could be anywhere in between those two scenarios, neither of which seems very promising.

Consider, also, the above assumes he will even like the footing offered by real dirt.

they'll all have their work cut out for them once they change surfaces.

that's right, and largely ignored by some. those horses should be treated the same way as a turf horse making a switch to dirt. it's a different surface. some can make the switch, many cannot. until those horses run on dirt, it's all up in the air.

No where near the same. Two totally differant type of horses. The only thing they have in common is that they ran in California before the Derby. I don't think Georgie Boy or any other horse running in SoCal has a chance to win the Derby, but this years 3yo are all in the same boat, not many stand outs.

Now with WP throwing in a clunker.....they're all "slow".

Yep...I think some are in for an awakening. This is actually a very talented bunch of 3 yos IMO. There are quite a few who you would say aren't 'slow'.;)

24.24/24.51/24.27/23.56/5.77

if they switch the derby to turf, i like him.

Ouch

I agree, i would more compare him to a 3yo Best Pal who was also a cal bred gelding. Mister Frisky was a an over acheiver who if not developed a golf ball size tumor in his throat , would have been a force in the TC races that year, imo.

do you have some examples of horses who couldn't transfer their good synthetic form to dirt, meaning they couldn't handle the dirt footing?

I haven't noticed really many examples of this. maybe I'm missing something.

Moniker should be changed to CluelessMaytoMay......Steve,Andy,DrugS and other ACCOMPLISHED Handicappers with are far greater understanding of Racehorses have repped that these colt stink... Geez wake up... Pyro could gert within 10 lengths of last years colts.

I am assuming if a horse runs big on poly or other fake stuff, and doesn't run well on dirt, he probably didn't handle the footing as well. That is all I was trying to say. Sure, maybe a lot of them handle it by running slower.

Wat about Sierra? And the LA Derby 3rd?

What about them? I wouldn't say either one of them ran very well on synthetic.

any prominent examples? horses that run slower on dirt, thats my question.

I thought that Yankee Bravo won the California Derby on Tapeta.

Its hard to read some of these posts anymore

How about one race of PPs, the Big Cap. All the following have run much better on synthetic than dirt:

Big Booster
Monterey Jazz
Zappa
Celtic Dreaming

Nobody is forcing you to.

Monterey Jazz just happen to get a track that we cant call a normal Synthetic track when he went wire to wire. I think he would of ran the same race on the old dirt track at Santa Anita. The horse just got good at the right time.

The top 3 finishers in the Big Cap were all turf horses.

these horses are better on synthetic? based on what criteria?
lets take a look at these horses records.


Big Booster
dirt record 8 3-0-0
aw record 5 1-0-2
appears to favor dirt

Monterrey Jazz
dirt record 3 1-0-1
aw record 3 1-0-1
has won in the past year going short and long on dirt, aw, and turf.

Zappa
dirt record 11 4-1-4
aw record 5 3-0-1
does well on aw, but also seems to run on any surface. won a 3 turn stakes race last year on the FPX dirt.

Celtic Dreamin
dirt record 2 2-0-0
aw record 7 3-4-0
I love this horse. he never runs a bad race. however you can't say he prefers aw because he is undefeated on dirt winning convincingly both times.

what I am looking for, are examples of horses that run well on synthetic (aw), but show a marked decline in form whenever they try dirt. these examples do not fit that description.

I really hope you are kidding.

In his final start on dirt, which was March 24th of 2007, Big Booster was 4th beaten 5 lengths at odds of even money in a 50K claiming race.

In his first start on synthetic, which was May 24th of 2007, Big Booster (under 123 pounds) wins an alw race on synthetic by 3/4 of a length at 25/1 odds. The 2nd place finisher, it was Heatseeker (under 113 pounds)

In his 2nd start on synthetic, Big Booster is beaten less than one length in the Hollywood Gold Cup at 25/1 odds.

Either KYRIM stole your login - or you are out of your mind for saying that Big Booster appears to favor dirt over synthetic.

Since beating Heatseeker at 25/1 odds in an alw race in his synthetic debut - Big Booster has raced exclusively and competitively in Grade 1 or Grade 2 stakes.

When Big Booster was racing on dirt, he was either competitive in claiming races at Gulfstream - or getting blown out in allowance races on the AQU inner dirt.

Yeah, we all know that Mike Mitchell had nothing to do with it;)

Here is the reality of switching surfaces for the first time...

Some horses can run better on the synthetic, some can run better on the dirt, some can run better on the turf, and some can run just as good on a combination of the surfaces or all of the surfaces. It is your job as a handicapper to figure out which horses can make the switch when they try out a new surface for the first time because it happens a lot more now than it used to, and there is money to be made...

you say this, but he really doesn't have any major drug violations. Now, I don't think he is a drugger, but I do think he is a shaker, but a majority are out there, especially given the rule that they are allowed to have a horse over the natural level of tCO2, that they can produce.

Mike Mitchell moves horses way up off the claim.

Not all the trainers out there do that kind of stuff. There are some good guys in horse racing out there.

Mitchell also had him when he ran 8th in his first start in California before being placed on a synthetic. Peter Walder (who is currently 18-for-51 and winning at a 35% clip at GP) trained him when he was 4th on the dirt in the 50K claimer.

Mitchell obviously played a role in this horse improving - but that has nothing to do with the surface question.

Peter Walder is one of the highest percentage guys around - he's not some bum who gets in horses way.

Becerra off the claim is just as strong as Mitchell, and there are no allegations there. Becerra just doesn't claim as much as Mitchell. For every 50k claimer that turned into a stakes, he has one running for 10k 2 months later.

Sun Boat too? RIP buddy.

For horses like Big Booster and Sun Boat, I think there are other variables that could account for their improvement. I'm not just going to say that it was the synthetic. There are other examples of horses out there that are definitely better on synthetic than dirt that don't have question marks about their improvement like these horses.

I'm not really one that usually talks bad about trainers, and if I do there is always a very valid reason. I would never use Mike Mitchell as a trainer. I will leave it at that.

Has Heatseeker ever ran over the traditional dirt surface?