Autopsy
The squawking and screaming in the media over the Derby results has been something to see.
In my view, here's what happened:
A suicidal pace developed (as I suspected it would) totally compromising the chances of much of the field. The horse who won came from far back, had the experience and professionalism to wind his way through traffic (reportedly actually jumping another horse's heels at one point), wait, and go when asked. Though he did not complete the distance quickly, for the Derby, he got to the finish wire first. And that's what counts.
That's no less of a deserving win than a horse benefiting from being the lone speed in the field, from catching a preferred wet surface, or getting a good trip when a favorite has traffic trouble. Giacomo showed toughness and mental composure, and I think that his good foundation of experience, the work of his trainer, contributed to that.
I would never have picked Giacomo based on his past performances, but had I known what Mike Smith thought of him (which no one ever bothered to report) I wouldn't have dismissed him so easily.
Would he have won had the pace been less idiotic? I doubt it. But I also think that winners such as Smarty Jones (who I think was potentially a genuinely great horse), Funny Cide and War Emblem, just to name a couple, would not have won the race as it was run this year. Nobody within scorching distance of that pace lasted.
The screeches of the pedigree mavens make me scratch my head. Of the horses who were lauded as "bred for the distance", Bandini finished next to last while washy before the race, reluctant to load, and came out with an injury; Andromeda's Hero made no impact; Noble Causeway made no impact; Bellamy Road got a horrible trip, 5 or 6 wide almost the whole way while pressing the pace and came out with an injury; Coin Silver made no impact; Don't Get Mad made an impressive stretch run to finish fourth; Wilko bled while running fairly well. As much as I support breeding for stamina and running long races -- I would like to see a series of 1 1/2 to 2-mile stakes races for older horses inaugurated -- it doesn't make sense to me to claim that only horses bred a certain pre-determined way can succeed at a distance when the evidence in front of me is otherwise. The pattern that I see is one of good racehorses producing same.
And the other lesson of this Derby, I think, is that experience counts.
I don't think it was responsible for Spanish Chestnut's connections to run him -- they risked his well-being and compromised other horses' chances when he himself had no chance to win -- but he was there, and the pace was crazy, and Giacomo's experience and professionalism, combined with those of John Shirreffs and Mike Smith, enabled him to win. And, honestly, seeing a huge longshot attain the elusive dream is part of what horse racing is all about.
So quit whining already, y'all.
In my view, here's what happened:
A suicidal pace developed (as I suspected it would) totally compromising the chances of much of the field. The horse who won came from far back, had the experience and professionalism to wind his way through traffic (reportedly actually jumping another horse's heels at one point), wait, and go when asked. Though he did not complete the distance quickly, for the Derby, he got to the finish wire first. And that's what counts.
That's no less of a deserving win than a horse benefiting from being the lone speed in the field, from catching a preferred wet surface, or getting a good trip when a favorite has traffic trouble. Giacomo showed toughness and mental composure, and I think that his good foundation of experience, the work of his trainer, contributed to that.
I would never have picked Giacomo based on his past performances, but had I known what Mike Smith thought of him (which no one ever bothered to report) I wouldn't have dismissed him so easily.
Would he have won had the pace been less idiotic? I doubt it. But I also think that winners such as Smarty Jones (who I think was potentially a genuinely great horse), Funny Cide and War Emblem, just to name a couple, would not have won the race as it was run this year. Nobody within scorching distance of that pace lasted.
The screeches of the pedigree mavens make me scratch my head. Of the horses who were lauded as "bred for the distance", Bandini finished next to last while washy before the race, reluctant to load, and came out with an injury; Andromeda's Hero made no impact; Noble Causeway made no impact; Bellamy Road got a horrible trip, 5 or 6 wide almost the whole way while pressing the pace and came out with an injury; Coin Silver made no impact; Don't Get Mad made an impressive stretch run to finish fourth; Wilko bled while running fairly well. As much as I support breeding for stamina and running long races -- I would like to see a series of 1 1/2 to 2-mile stakes races for older horses inaugurated -- it doesn't make sense to me to claim that only horses bred a certain pre-determined way can succeed at a distance when the evidence in front of me is otherwise. The pattern that I see is one of good racehorses producing same.
And the other lesson of this Derby, I think, is that experience counts.
I don't think it was responsible for Spanish Chestnut's connections to run him -- they risked his well-being and compromised other horses' chances when he himself had no chance to win -- but he was there, and the pace was crazy, and Giacomo's experience and professionalism, combined with those of John Shirreffs and Mike Smith, enabled him to win. And, honestly, seeing a huge longshot attain the elusive dream is part of what horse racing is all about.
So quit whining already, y'all.
posted by Kyri at 8:37 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home