|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
07-17-2006, 12:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
He ran the same race yesterday as he always has ... which is good enough to win against palookas ... but not good enough to win against decent quality sprinters ... much less really good sprinters. 
|
|
#2
07-17-2006, 01:19 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Jeff Sanchez, who rode the winner said when he was running next to LITF said it was clear the horse was just spinning and not taking to the track. Pleanty of rumors at Calder Saturday that the horse wasn't 100% for the race. Factors were 1. A track lots of horses didn't like. 2. Physical questions. 3. Tons of weight. 4. He may well not be as good as last year. When he's giving 8 lbs to another Grade 1 winner (Pomeroy) and you come on here and call the horse a fraud when you know NOTHIING about the race shows you are still a fool.
|
|
#3
07-17-2006, 01:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
In the BC Sprint, I personally don't think that LITF fired. However, you could at leat make a case that he fired. He showed some speed and he got tired. You could at least make a halfway credible argument that he fired but just wasn't good enough. In yesterday's race, nobody in their right mind could think the horse fired. He didn't even show any early speed yesterday. He was behind KL in the early going. That was not the same race that LITF usually runs. He always shows early speed. Yesterday was the first time ever that he showed no speed. You can't argue that he showed no speed because the horses were too fast because we know that LITF is normally much faster than KL in the early going.
|
|
#4
07-17-2006, 11:35 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I am not a Calder expert, but I know it tends to be a slowish track so the Smile fractions of 21 3/5 and 44 1/5 are probably even hotter than they would be at many tracks. Last year, LITF got an easy lead through 22 2/5 and 45 2/5 in the Carry Back and won for fun. They went a lot faster than that in the Smile and he simply couldn't cope. In fact, he ran his opening quarter about as fast as he did in the Carry Back last year, but that put him midpack against open company rather than winging on the lead against 3YOs, which is pretty much his story in a nutshell. This horse has yet to win a race against open company in which something else threw a sub-22-second opening quarter at him. Some people seem to think that early pace is trivial, but actually, it's critically important, particularly in the case of forwardly placed sprinters. The difference between a comfortable 22-and-change quarter on a neutral track vs. a 21-and-change quarter on the same track is potentially monumental. Given that tracks vary from one race to the next, never mind between tracks, LITF has shown that when able to get an easy lead, or with only one weak horse in front of him, through 22/44-45 fractions, he's strong middle and late. That happened in the races against the nonentities in the age-restricted races that LITF shipped all over creation to run in last year. He also had no trouble with the horses that showed up for the Bay Meadows race against older. (Considering that it was scheduled for the same date as the Vosburgh and within a week of the Ancient Title and announced about three weeks in advance, you can imagine that it didn't exactly draw the best sprinters in the land.) By the way, LITF is two for five in open-age races. Regarding Kelly's Landing, you might want to actually check the horse's lines before you speak. KL is not exactly a speed demon, but he is not without speed. Actually, he prepped for the Aristides in a CD allowance where he was battling on the lead in 21 3/5 and 44 1/5, which is faster than anything LITF has successfully handled outside of northern California and Turf Paradise. KL was two and a half lengths behind LITF after the opening quarter of the Aristides and whittled that down to a length after a half, a margin that LITF was unable to extend greatly thereafter despite a perfect scenario. To put that in perspective, KL is a G3 winner who has been unplaced in his graded stakes sprints starts away from CD. I learned a long time ago that it's impossible to budge an opinion, so I'm not going to waste any more time researching this topic this time around. It needs to be said, however. There are those of us who feel, and have felt for some time, that LITF is overrated and we have some justification to do so.
|
|
#5
07-17-2006, 01:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
With regard to your contention that he's overrated, he could be slightly overrated. It's possible. But that's not really the issue. The issue is whether you're opinion is being based on races that he didn't fire. He certainly didn't fire on Saturday. There was obviously something bothering him and that was why he was behind a horse early who he is normally 4 lengths in front of. And what makes you think that he ran his best in the BC Sprint? Horses are not machines. You can't ship a horse back and forth all across the country and expect them to keep firing every time. He had too tough of a campaign last year and it finally caught up to him. You can't judge a horse off one or two races. Why would you judge him off one or two bad races but not judge other horses the same way? How many bad races has Taste of Paradise run? He almsot won the BC Sprint but if you look at his Form he has lost a ton of races to mediocre horses. Look at Silver Train. Look at all of his bad races. He ran 3rd to Tani Maru in a restricted stakes race. A couple races later, he got beat by Santana Springs and Social Probabtion in the Amsterdam. He lost to Spooky Mulder this year. People criticize LITF because he mainly faced 3 year olds last year. At least he was facing the best 3 year old sprinters. Silver Train faced nothing but 3 year olds last year and he wasn't even facing good 3 year olds. He was losing allowance races against 3 year olds. Silver Train ran 6 times last year before the BC Sprint. He ran against 3 year olds in five of those six races. The only time he faced older horses was in a non-winners other than allowance race. So Silver Train was runing against far worse 3 year olds than LITF and he was losing. How do you explain that? If you look at Silver's Train's past performances last year leading up to the BC Sprint, you can't even compare his races to LITF's races. Silver Train was facing bad 3 year olds and was losing.
|
|
#6
07-17-2006, 04:45 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#7
07-17-2006, 04:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Baze was able to get a relatively easy opening quarter but still had to hustle LITF in the stretch to hold off Kellys Landing.
|
|
#8
07-17-2006, 01:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I think that people that use Bris pace and speed numbers maybe have an advantage in picking this up. Before Saturday there were two times that LITF ran very fast pace numbers to the 1/4 and both of those times he paid for it in the late pace ending up flat, the BC Sprint and his first race of this year against Carthage. In the Aristides he was able to run a 1/4 pace that was comfortable and the result was about as good as it gets for him. In the opening part of the Smile LITF got out of the gate preety good and for a short time he was in the mix. But then the real speedballs kicked it in and I believe Baze knew he had to take back a little. He tried to make a run going into the turn but that's not his game. There a mass hysteria with this horse and people keep citing his record, 11 wins in 14 starts, several G1's , blah, blah, blah. Ok that was a great 3YO season against a suspect group, but where does that put him now. Forget about the past, he is 1 win in four starts against real competition. They will have to pick their spots for him if they keep racing him, he can win lesser sprints from time to time. However I think they know he does not belong on the path to the BC sprint. With all that said I believe, like others have suggested, that rather than further diminish his reputation that he will be retired.
|
|
#9
07-17-2006, 02:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
What you're saying is obviously absurd. No horse runs the same every time, not even LITF. All of these horses have physical problems and based on the way they are feeling, somedays they fire and other days they don't. They don't run their best every time. I know you think that LITF is a machine and runs his best every time but you are wrong.
|
|
#10
07-17-2006, 03:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
When a horse finishes towards the back of the field ... ten or more lengths behind in a 6f race ... it doesn't really matter if he ran his best race or not ... there's no way he was going to win. Was Lost In The Fog at his very best for both the BC Sprint and Smile? Macht nichts ... no way he was going to win either race ... he's just not good enough.
|
|
#11
07-17-2006, 04:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I'm not saying that I agree with you, but at least what you are saying is reasonable. Here is why I disagree with you though: You guys are basically saying that LITF lost the BC Sprint because he's not that good and he's not a Grade I horse. Here's the problem with that logic. There weren't really any Grade I horses in the BC Sprint. It was actually a pretty weak field last year. Who won the BC Sprint? Silver Train. Who was he? He was a 3 year old who had done way less than LITF. Silver Train was losing to bad 3 year olds all year. The knock on LITF was that he was only winning graded stakes races against 3 year olds. Silver Train was losing ungraded stakes races and allowane races agaisnt 3 year olds. So even if LITF was not a true Grade I horse, he should have still been able to beat Silver Train. How did ST win the race? He wasn't a Grade I horse. I'm sure you guys though that LITF was a much better horse than ST going into that race. ST had never done anything. The field was so bad that ST, who was consistently losing to 3 year olds, only went off at 11-1. What does that tell you? It wasn't that tough of a field. LITF would have been very competetive if he would have run his best.
|
|
#12
07-17-2006, 04:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I will agree that overall LITF has run very consistently and no that doesn't make him the greatest horse of all time. It just means that he has been well taken care of and spotted well. Many times sprinters when they are off their game run way out, like 15 lenghts or more. LITF has not had races like that and overall he's been pretty consisent. His worst efforts are when he has to face one or more horses that can run a very fast pace to the quarter. I saw in another post of yours you stated that LITF has as much early speed as any horse in the country. Therein lies your mistake because that is far from true. If and when he tries to match the fastest horses for early speed he will not finish well. How is it that he fires in every race that fits the pace description and competition level that I previously gave and he mis-fires every time he is in against tough horses? You say he is sore and has physical problems. I don't know if that's true and I don't think you know that for a fact either. I would just point out that if he had many physical problems on Saturday I think he would have finished much worse than he did. I really can't assess that race in full until I see the pace numbers. It's very possible that it was a sub par effort for him and maybe a physical issue contributed to it or it could be just what happens when a horse is over matched, they do not have a peak performance because everything doesn't set up in an optimal way for them. My main point is that even in peak condition he does not win that race. This isn't the first time that a horse dominates his age group but then shows to be much more up against it versus open company. He's not an off the pace type and yet he can't wire a top field like he faced Saturday.
|
|
#13
07-17-2006, 05:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
And yes, I do know for a fact that the horse is hurting right now. First of all, trainers don't lie and say their horse is hurt when they're not. They often times do the opposite and say that a sore horse is fine. They don't say that a sound horse is hurt. I've been in the business for over 20 years and I can't think of any trainer saying that a sound horse was hurt. In addition to Gilchrist admitting the horse has physical problmes this year that he didn't have last year, I saw the horse gallop myself. I saw him gallop last month and he galloped sore. With regard to whether LITF runs the same every time, he definitely does not. Some of his wins last year were much more impressive than other wins. In some of his wins, I would estimate that he ran 3-4 lengths better than in some of his less impressive wins. I'd have to pull out the videos to refresh my memory, but I remember him finishing very strong in some of those wins and not as strong in some of the other wins. One thing that you are obviously not good at is judging a horse based on a win against a weak field. There are horses that break their maidens every day by 5 lengths. How do you know if the horse is a good horse or not? He didn't beat anyone if he simply won a maiden race. If you knew what you were looking at, you would have a very good idea of a horse's ability based on a maiden win. You need to be able to look at a horse's stride and judge a horse based on that. That is what I do for a living. That is how I can make a $500,000 offer based on a maiden win. That is why I am good at picking out 2 year olds at the sales based on 1/8 of a mile works. Going to back to the subject of buying horses who just broke their maiden, we actually offered them $800,000 for Wild Fit based on her maiden win. She didn't win by that big a margin and she didn't run that fast, but I was right about her. A few months later she ended up running 2nd in the Breeder's Cup and was sold for $3 million.
|
|
#14
07-17-2006, 09:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
The horse was too damn good to scrap so soon imo.
|
|
#15
07-17-2006, 09:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Even when running against stiffs ... he never really closed out a race with a flourish. The last furlong has always been a problem for him. Poor opposition masked it ... but stronger opposition exposed it. While he benefited from G3 ... or worse ... opposition in G1 3YO races ... this horse is simply not a G1-quality sprinter in open company.
|
|
#16
07-17-2006, 10:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#17
07-17-2006, 10:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
The record shows that Lost In The Fog can't compete against open G1/G2-quality company. He's attempted it twice ... and finished way up the track both times. The checkered history of Breeder's Cup races is totally irrelevant to those facts.
|
|
#18
07-17-2006, 11:34 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The historical demises of the Breeder's Cup Sprint favorites would have all the relevance in the world if they were the essence of Bold Brooklynite's argument . As per the gaggle of hyperventilating LITF goo-goos he describes, I have cruised 4-5 different racing forums for a while, and never have seen this horse compared to Dr. Fager, nor have I seen quite the cannonization he describes . But then his posts wouldn't be so dramatic, would they ? Before the BC, the horse was perfect, and had won in NY as well . He proved the most consistent sprinter and was deserving of the Eclipse last year . Saratoga County, IMO, was perhaps the best horse,but did not live to prove it. The LITF that ran in the BC unfortunately washed out pre-race, a critical factor to his detractors . Prominent early, he definitely chucked it when it counted . I agree with much of Phalaris' observations of him as a sprinter . I agree that more was expected of him than he ultimately delivered . It is hard not to dream when presented with ten perfect runs . I was a believer, though I always breathed normally . This year's model LITF is different . Physical issues have been admitted . What has not been discussed is that the horse, never pleasant tempered, has become rough and studdish . Far better animals than he have been compromised by "nads" . Count Fleet and Fair Play both lost races for this reason . Fair Play in fact, proved worthless at four because his mind was elsewhere . Fact, not excuses . LITF may run his race consistently and get beaten for whatever reason, but this last race was atypical . NO RESPONSE, NO SPEED . The con arguments would have far more merit had he gotten the lead, battled it out, lost it to a " better " horse, then finished up the track . He was a no show . To the poster who said all racehorses are frauds, I would be happier if the word fraud was replaced by fallable or not machines--otherwise the thinking is sound .
|
|
#19
07-17-2006, 03:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
But be very careful ... the hyperventilation may knock you right out of your chair. And note that I was making the exact same analysis then that I am now ... nine months later.
|
|
#20
07-17-2006, 03:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
First it was a quarter crack ... then he was "washed out" ... then it was "just one bad race" ... now we get the biggest doozie of them all ... ... he didn't run because he was too horny! Well ... at least it's a new tune that we hadn't heard before. I don't like the lyrics ... but it's got a good beat and I can dance to it. Sheeeesh !!!
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
