Kings Bishop

[miff]

JB,

If you have Mo in the neg -5 range then you are discounting that the maintenance before the race made it faster than it was all day,fair enough.Not an unreasonable assumption but the fastest races ever run(raw) at Belmont are almost always on a wet fast surface, sometimes by horses that are not even at the stakes level.

It makes no sense on any racing level that the Belmont surface did NOT change speed on Sat and imo it did more than once.

So you\'ll have MO sitting on reaction off the 4 point top, I\'ll go after him for  that and other reasons.

Mike

[Rick B.]

miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>I\'ll go after him for  that and other reasons.

Seems like the correct place to ask the experts here: will the so-called \"supertesting\" be in place for the BC races at Churchill this year?

[TGJB]

I did have the track faster for that race than any other, and his number not quite as fast as that. It\'s plenty tricky, though-- combine changing track speeds with short fields and you don\'t have much to work with. The good news is these are high level horses who have run a bunch of times-- you get days like this with rained off grass maiden races and it\'s a bitch.

The way you handle situations like this is the same as when Quality Road ran his huge one or Midnight Lute ran his first one-- you disregard the winner and do it off the others. Phil23 had the right idea above.

[miff]

Rick B,

Not much of a testing guy concerning races at the major venues but Dr Mary Scollay of the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission responded to me on two occasions that BC horses are super tested.

Mike

[Silver Charm]

Short fields, sloppy tracks, uncontested pace! But The Figures have value and there were several sharp winners on Saturday.

At Belmont and out West!