This is a place for friendly and civil discussion of horse racing of all types including handicapping.
Latest 9:04 AM by Wintertrian
Latest 2:38 AM by TexSquared
Latest Sep-16 by TexSquared
Latest Sep-15 by DogsUp
Latest Sep-15 by Wintertrian
Latest Sep-13 by DogsUp
Latest Jun-17 by PISTOL9
Latest Sep-13 by RAESFAN
Latest Sep-12 by Wintertrian
Latest Sep-6 by Wintertrian
Latest Sep-5 by Plus2lbs
Latest Sep-4 by zowcownow
Latest Sep-1 by zowcownow
Latest Aug-31 by TexSquared
Latest Aug-31 by Husker (Birdman506)
Latest Aug-29 by zowcownow
Latest Aug-28 by zowcownow
Latest Aug-28 by zowcownow
Latest Aug-27 by ChiefsCrown
Latest Aug-26 by zowcownow
Latest Aug-18 by zowcownow
This year looks to be the first in at least 21 years without a RAN sire line horse in the Belmont. Not sure how much farther this goes back.
Temperance Hill in 1980 appears to be the last T2 sire line Belmont winner.
Loved Temperance Hill! Global Campaign would have been a RAN in the race but... :/
Downey now has Bourbon War as probable. That makes 4 API’s (3 of which are Tapit’s), 3 ND’s, 2 Turn 2’s, and not a single RAN. Strange year.
Bourbon War is a definite per Mark Hennig after working at Belmont today
Gerh said...I don’t know what to make of Master Fencer now.Just because the x-rays were negative doesn’t mean that the horse isn’t sore.Will have to keep an eye on him next week
Since you probably don't have veterinary records on ANY horse you've most likely wagered on (at least if you are participating in the totally non-transparent racing game that is U.S. racing) I really am not sure how you can know that any other horse in the races you are betting on isn't *sore*.
You also don't know if they've received ESWT, o2 chamber treatment, pinfiring, etc.
At LEAST in this case, you have an actual veterinary report. So explain to me why you would trust all the other horses you supported in the derby, for instance. :winks:
Justify was visibly limping while Baffert was running his mouth being his usual circus entertainer personality. Explain the difference.
Everyone's idea of a "bad sign" is different. For me it would be this: War of Will won't breeze before the Belmont
Right now I'll stick w/the ones I still like until the final PPs come out and I can see everybody next to each other.
Its one of the things I deduct for on my chart: "They have to breeze before the Belmont regardless of how hard they ran in the Derby and Preakness"
Wonder if he breezed between the derby and the Preakness? Maybe just galloped, no idea.
Right now my head says WoW just ahead of Tacitus and Spinoff. But I’ve got to think WoW fades and gets caught; Spinoff should be close enough to do it. He wasn’t near the front in the derby but that was atypical for him in the slop. I think Tacitus will be too far back.
I don't see a fast pace, so I don't think Tacitus will be far back. In his maiden win, he was only a shade over two lengths back at the half run in under :47. He has some tactical speed, and was far back in the TBD and the Wood, because of horses pretty much winging it early. I anticipate the race being run like a European grass race, where everyone will gallop along before picking it up at the mile marker. :24+, :48+, 1:13+, 1:38+, 2:03+, +2:29+; Slow pace, slow race! Having said that, now I've set it up for someone to try to steal the race on the front end!