Is Curlin being overrated by the margins over nothing horses?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by easy goer

But Bernardini is also contra evidence. He had not been tested at all prior to the Preakness and he won that. Do you recall the talk back then? There were some that were convinced a horse like that could not win others said they saw the previous race and were really impressed.

perhaps a better idea is to first ask what do you think "pressure" really means? i.e. is it a psychological factor of running near other horses or is it simply the idea of running fractions that are slightly faster than he's used to runnning?

I tend to lean on the latter idea, sometimes running that fourth fraction in 24.5 rather than 25 can make a huge difference at the end. It's not psychological but rather biological. But there are psychological issues involved no doubt.

How do you view the issue?

bernardini was fourth in his first start, i don't know much about that race, how it was run, who won it--but he certainly finished behind some horses in his debut.
as for curlin--the question remains, much like bernardini, is what will he do when he gets eyeballed? a lot of people say who knows what will happen, since he hasn't been, but what if curlin hasn't been because no one can keep up with him long enough to test him? now, after only three starts, i'm certainly not going to start with the 'he's a monster' talk (of course, i have seen that mentioned here) or he can't be tested--he's only run three times!

as to whether he's overrated due to large margins, i guess i'd rather have a horse who may be overrated due to big wins, then to have a horse suffering narrow losses, or barely eking out a win.
so, what helps you to sleep better at night if it's your horse? big win, or narrow but gutsy win?

Originally Posted by Danzig

so, what helps you to sleep better at night if it's your horse? big win, or narrow but gutsy win?

as a general prop. probably the gutsy win. Because usually the gutsy win comes at the expense of another good horse and the easy win comes at the expense of chumps and tends to be overrated.

But it's hard to use generalities when you have to bet on an individual horse. If you were to read about these races 100 years from now you, and didnt know the outcome of the derby, you'd probably think Curlin was some flash in the pan who had ran against nobodies. And the best horses had run in FL.

Every time you apply generalities to a horse race you risk being undone by a horse that seems to defy it. Barbaro gunning from the 10 hole at GP. No one had won from that hole at two turns at the new park.

There's really no way to know for sure. Otherwise I guess the parimutual system would have gone broke years ago.