Gotta love Watchmaker....

blackthroatedwind · #1 10-16-2006, 08:50 PM

This idea that someone who points out a trip that cost a horse a victory in a race somehow infers that the same person also lost money on said horse is ridiculous. Even if the person did lose money on said horse, which I doubt Watch did, it doesn't take away from the validity of the comments. Anyone can watch the replay of the Champagne and verify what was stated...it is obvious his analysis of NoBiz's trip is accurate.

randallscott35 · #2 10-16-2006, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

This idea that someone who points out a trip that cost a horse a victory in a race somehow infers that the same person also lost money on said horse is ridiculous. Even if the person did lose money on said horse, which I doubt Watch did, it doesn't take away from the validity of the comments. Anyone can watch the replay of the Champagne and verify what was stated...it is obvious his analysis of NoBiz's trip is accurate.

I agree with this and I would add that I don't understand the importance of giving credit to one horse over the other. Scat Daddy ran a great race. Why couldn't No Biz have run an equally great race (his 2nd lifetime start) Joel, why exactly are the two mutually exclusive? They sure as hell shouldn't be.

#3 10-16-2006, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by randallscott35

I agree with this and I would add that I don't understand the importance of giving credit to one horse over the other. Scat Daddy ran a great race. Why couldn't No Biz have run an equally great race (his 2nd lifetime start) Joel, why exactly are the two mutually exclusive? They sure as hell shouldn't be.

I never said Nobiz didn't run a good race...he did...but you never saw Watchmaker write an article about Scat Daddy's trip when he had a HORRID trip in the Hopeful, did he?...NO...

If you have the audasity to write about a loser, they better not have been a false favorite at 8-5 IMO....give the public something not from the Captain Obvious playbook....I see it as making excuses for foolishly taking a short price on a non-deserving favorite.....

randallscott35 · #4 10-16-2006, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

I never said Nobiz didn't run a good race...he did...but you never saw Watchmaker write an article about Scat Daddy's trip when he had a HORRID trip in the Hopeful, did he?...NO...

If you have the audasity to write about a loser, they better not have been a false favorite at 8-5 IMO....give the public something not from the Captain Obvious playbook....I see it as making excuses for foolishly taking a short price on a non-deserving favorite.....

I guess my problem is that you act like Scat won this race by 6 under wraps. Simply not the case. I hope he wins the Juvy for you b/c you have a thing for him. I'll leave it at that.....

#5 10-16-2006, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

This idea that someone who points out a trip that cost a horse a victory in a race somehow infers that the same person also lost money on said horse is ridiculous. Even if the person did lose money on said horse, which I doubt Watch did, it doesn't take away from the validity of the comments. Anyone can watch the replay of the Champagne and verify what was stated...it is obvious his analysis of NoBiz's trip is accurate.

For a 8-5 favorite to get beat and then an article to be written about him headlined "You can pin a star on this colt's stall" is a tad ridiculous to me....

Apparentally, he was supposed to win by his odds and he didn't....he had no real excuse IMO....hell, Scat Daddy had worse journeys in the Sanford and Hopeful IMO and nobody came out and wrote excuses about his trip....the way I look at it, Nobiz saved a lot of ground, while Scat Daddy raced far wider and moved far wider....and Scat Daddy still flew by him with plenty left in the tank while racing green.....

I smell a wagering-induced article...<sniff, sniff>

Cajungator26 · #6 10-16-2006, 08:57 PM

My Champagne pick is still running, I think...

I thought that both Scat Daddy AND Nobiz were running green... I still think that Scat Daddy wins the BC Juvy though.

ArlJim78 · #7 10-16-2006, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

For a 8-5 favorite to get beat and then an article to be written about him headlined "You can pin a star on this colt's stall" is a tad ridiculous to me....

Apparentally, he was supposed to win by his odds and he didn't....he had no real excuse IMO..

Its statements like this that really make me laugh.

ateamstupid · #8 10-16-2006, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

For a 8-5 favorite to get beat and then an article to be written about him headlined "You can pin a star on this colt's stall" is a tad ridiculous to me....

Apparentally, he was supposed to win by his odds and he didn't....he had no real excuse IMO....hell, Scat Daddy had worse journeys in the Sanford and Hopeful IMO and nobody came out and wrote excuses about his trip....the way I look at it, Nobiz saved a lot of ground, while Scat Daddy raced far wider and moved far wider....and Scat Daddy still flew by him with plenty left in the tank while racing green.....

I smell a wagering-induced article...<sniff, sniff>

You are so unbelievably biased, it's laughable. What the hell difference does it make if the public overbet him as to whether this horse is a star or not? So stars never get beaten at short odds? He was overbet. You already stated this. He shouldn't have been 8/5. What the **** does that have to do with the horse's talent?

You know what's a "tad ridiculous" to ME? The fact that your horse is, according to you, still "very green" in his fourth start, three weeks from his biggest race of the year, and you interpret that as a positive sign. THAT'S ridiculous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

f every horse I bet got the trip that NoBiz had, I would be very happy. How often is a come-from-behinder able to hug the rail like that and have such a huge gap open up on the rail in the middle of the turn? It doesn't happen very often. That ground saving trip more than made up for the sluggish start that he had. Overall, I think he had a great trip. I think the best horse clearly won.

Oh yes, he's a "come-from-behinder," for sure. This characterization is based on what, exactly? He broke his maiden from within two lengths of the lead BECAUSE TAGG TOLD CORNELIO NOT TO GO TO THE LEAD, then he gets shut off at the break of this race and starts out in ninth, and now he's a "come-from-behinder." Right.

Rupert Pupkin · #9 10-16-2006, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

You are so unbelievably biased, it's laughable. What the hell difference does it make if the public overbet him as to whether this horse is a star or not? So stars never get beaten at short odds? He was overbet. You already stated this. He shouldn't have been 8/5. What the **** does that have to do with the horse's talent?

You know what's a "tad ridiculous" to ME? The fact that your horse is, according to you, still "very green" in his fourth start, three weeks from his biggest race of the year, and you interpret that as a positive sign. THAT'S ridiculous.

Oh yes, he's a "come-from-behinder," for sure. This characterization is based on what, exactly? He broke his maiden from within two lengths of the lead BECAUSE TAGG TOLD CORNELIO NOT TO GO TO THE LEAD, then he gets shut off at the break of this race and starts out in ninth, and now he's a "come-from-behinder." Right.

He is a come-from-behinder. He doesn't have sprint speed. That's why he made his debut in a one mile race. This horse is clearly a router. Running in a one-turn race against horses with sprint-speed, I would certainly call him a come-from-behinder. He was running against horses with :44 and change speed. I don't think they wanted to be up there going head and head with the Lukas horse any way.

ateamstupid · #10 10-16-2006, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

He is a come-from-behinder. He doesn't have sprint speed. That's why he made his debut in a one mile race. This horse is clearly a router. Running in a one-turn race against horses with sprint-speed, I would certainly call him a come-from-behinder. He was running against horses with :44 and change speed. I don't think they wanted to be up there going head and head with the Lukas horse any way.

The horse ran a :45 3/5 half in his debut, and because he was at the back of the pack early (DUE TO THE BAD START) in The Champagne, you think he's a come-from-behinder.

I guess the horses with sprint speed stayed in the barn, because fractions of :24 and :47 4/5 certainly aren't fractions I see in many sprint races.

And just because they didn't want him going eye-to-eye with Pegasus Wind means he's a come-from-behinder? I guess you'd have to define come-from-behinder for me then, because I say he's a stalker who likes to be 2-3 lengths off the lead. That could be wrong, but so far, there's more evidence in my favor than in yours.

Rupert Pupkin · #11 10-16-2006, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

The horse ran a :45 3/5 half in his debut, and because he was at the back of the pack early (DUE TO THE BAD START) in The Champagne, you think he's a come-from-behinder.

I guess the horses with sprint speed stayed in the barn, because fractions of :24 and :47 4/5 certainly aren't fractions I see in many sprint races.

And just because they didn't want him going eye-to-eye with Pegasus Wind means he's a come-from-behinder? I guess you'd have to define come-from-behinder for me then, because I say he's a stalker who likes to be 2-3 lengths off the lead. That could be wrong, but so far, there's more evidence in my favor than in yours.

I didn't mean that he wants to come from 10 back. I would agree with you that he is a stalker. I just meant that I wouldn't call him a speed horse, especially in a race where there are horses with sprint speed.

On paper, it looked like there was alot of speed in the race and I would have figured that NoBiz would be about 4-6 lengths behind. As slow as the fractions ended up being run, he could have been right there early.

blackthroatedwind · #12 10-16-2006, 10:51 PM

I appreciate your candor in watching the race and being forthright in suggesting that NoBiz had a tougher trip than you originally thought. This is exactly what intelligent disection of a race can do for all of us, certainly myself included, as because of Watch's comments, and thus this thread, you were able to see the race at least a little better. I'm glad someone benefited from that obviously biased article

.

Linny · #13 10-17-2006, 01:31 PM

I saw the race differently from everyone I guess. While I was impressed with NoBiz' move into contention I really disliked the way he leaned into Pegasus Wind when they turned for home. He was hugging PW all the way down the lane. The photo that accompanies Mike W's article (front page of the Wed DRF) shows NoBiz being hauled off of the inside horse as Scat Daddy runs by.

It's the difference of opinion that makes the betting possible and I hope alot of folks absorb Watch's article and march to the windows to bet NoBiz next month. I think he's too green to win the BCJ. That said, I think he has a ton of natural ability and if he develops properly he should be a major stakes horse.

Also, PW held on well and could be a contender in some of the lesser stakes at the end of the year.

Suffolk Shippers · #14 10-16-2006, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

You are so unbelievably biased, it's laughable. What the hell difference does it make if the public overbet him as to whether this horse is a star or not? So stars never get beaten at short odds? He was overbet. You already stated this. He shouldn't have been 8/5. What the **** does that have to do with the horse's talent?

Plenty actually. People bet him down to that level based on perceived "talent" up to and not including his pedigree, trainer, works, races, who he raced, etc. Based on that, people set this talent level of this horse at 8-5 over a horse who has more talent overall in Scat Daddy.

No Biz will probably be a decent horse, I dont think many people dispute that notion. Stars do get beaten at 8-5. Stars win at 5-2 as well. Fact of the matter is, we are dealing with babies and as soon as they are "stars" they are long forgotten sometimes. Not saying this will happen to either of them, but who the hell knows?

Also, the wagering level settled on by the public DOES represent the star quality of a horse. In fact, it makes a great point. We are WAY too quick to appoint stardom on these animals. For weeks now, since No Biz won his maiden, he has been the next star...well as is the situation many teams, the hype doesnt match up, at least right now. Who knows, maybe it will (personally, I say no). Looking at the facts, No Biz beat a horse from Pletcher's barn, maybe D Wayne, not 100% sure (and its too late to look up) who will probably be toiling in the fall mid level claimers at Churchill. That doesnt present star to me.

But, it does to some...and hell, I hope it does more often, and then my horse sits at 5-2 and is the clear class of the race. *Cash register sound*

Good arguments though.

ateamstupid · #15 10-16-2006, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suffolk Shippers

Plenty actually. People bet him down to that level based on perceived "talent" up to and not including his pedigree, trainer, works, races, who he raced, etc. Based on that, people set this talent level of this horse at 8-5 over a horse who has more talent overall in Scat Daddy.

I asked "what do the odds have to do with his talent?"

I didn't ask "what do the odds have to do with his perceived talent or what the public thinks his talent level is?"

The public doesn't decide how fast a horse is. The public decides how fast they think a horse is. Therefore, a horse's odds have NOTHING to do with how fast that horse actually is.

Rupert Pupkin · #16 10-16-2006, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

This is getting good. Better tell Lukas that instead of running Pegasus Wind in the Juvenile like he had planned, rightly so, because he was only beat a length or so by Super Scat who wins races with ease, and makes people rich, that instead he should be in mid level claimers. I'll make this "bold prediction" ala Mr Cunningham. Pegasus Wind, will win a stakes race this year.

I don't think Pegasus Wind will win a stakes race this year. His next start will be in the BC Juvenille. He's not going to win that race. He will probably be right up on the pace in that race. You can't expect that he will come out of a tough race like that and then run a great race in his next start. He may need a rest after the BC Juvenille. He could come back and win a stakes race this year but I think the odds are against it.

ArlJim78 · #17 10-16-2006, 09:00 PM

He just described what happened, I didn't detect at all any bitterness over losing a bet. Make no mistake, No Biz had a real bad time of it as MW pointed out. This horse has really impresssed me. Considering his trip and the race experience that he gave away to the others like Scat Daddy, I think you've got to give him a big look in the juvenile.

#18 10-16-2006, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

He just described what happened, I didn't detect at all any bitterness over losing a bet. Make no mistake, No Biz had a real bad time of it as MW pointed out. This horse has really impresssed me. Considering his trip and the race experience that he gave away to the others like Scat Daddy, I think you've got to give him a big look in the juvenile.

No doubt he is talented, but Mike cannot say that he was the best horse...that would be asonine....I haven't seen a two-year-old train in the mornings like Scat Daddy does since Afleet Alex....he's no fluke and very much deserves more credit than people give him....

NLS didn't lose that race...Scat Daddy won it

ArlJim78 · #19 10-16-2006, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

No doubt he is talented, but Mike cannot say that he was the best horse...that would be asonine....I haven't seen a two-year-old train in the mornings like Scat Daddy does since Afleet Alex....he's no fluke and very much deserves more credit than people give him....

NLS didn't lose that race...Scat Daddy won it

Keep the faith brother!!

Fyi, why can't Mike say he was the better horse despite losing? You yourself have made the case many times that you don't necessarily go by the race record to determine how good a horse is, that you can just watch them and know how good they are even if they do not win.

#20 10-16-2006, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

Keep the faith brother!!

Fyi, why can't Mike say he was the better horse despite losing? You yourself have made the case many times that you don't necessarily go by the race record to determine how good a horse is, that you can just watch them and know how good they are even if they do not win.

True, but when a horse by Albert the Great is a false favorite at 8-5 over a horse established as the class of the field by being a graded stakes winner from the best barn in New York, I wouldn't expect a feature article on how great Nobiz is....he failed the public as the chalk...plain and simple...why should he command the repsect he is getting now? It was expected that he should have won the Champagne and he failed....so why pin a star on his stall?