McCraken

[jbelfior]

Bandwagon wheels starting to wobble. 3 for 3 over the surface......wagon going to get even heavier as we get closer.

Would anyone bet against him going off the favorite assuming reasonable draw??


Good Luck,
Joe B

[Tale Of Ekati]

I\'m sorry Joe...McCraken the favorite of what race again?

[jbelfior]

Ok.....so who\'s the favorite?


Good Luck,
Joe B

[Fairmount1]

My Opinion:

McCracken is not going favored and I contemplated this possibility for a long time.  He could be second choice but I doubt that also on the following basis:  He has one Beyer Figure of 95 and no others in the 90\'s.  The final odds in the Derby and many races are strongly correlated to Beyer figs among other factors but the lack of a 100 Beyer when CE has one as 2yo and Irish War Cry has two 100 Beyer figs means McCracken won\'t be favored.  Just can\'t see it happening.

Classic Empire is the most likely favorite.  If not, IWC barely edges him.

[BitPlayer]

He\'s got the two preps and paired-tops pattern that have received accolades in TGJB\'s recent seminars.  Many are expecting a forward move based on his missing the Tampa Bay Derby and the ability of the Nafzger-Wilkes to prep for a big race.

For me, he\'s already improved 3 points from 2 to 3, he\'s still slower than many of these, and his dam was better sprinting.  I\'ve read that the Churchill surface in autumn is different from the spring surface.  I would not be surprised if he runs well, but he wouldn\'t be for me as the favorite or anything like it.  Of course, I said the same thing about California Chrome, Nyquist, etc.

[Tale Of Ekati]

How in the world can McCraken be favored in this spot above:
1) Classic Empire
2) Always Dreaming
3) Irish War Cry

[jimbo66]

Always hard to predict betting odds in the Derby.

That said, no shot in hell that McCracken goes off favored, or even 2nd choice.

Small chance for 3rd choice, but more likely 4th choice.

Classic Empire probably 45% shot to be favored.
Always Dreamin\' 40%.
Irish War Cry 15%.

Unless IWC has a huge week training, which seems unlikely since he won\'t be at CD as of current plans.

Jim

[Airnate012]

He should be 4th choice around 10/1 I would figure.

[bellsbendboy]

Without knocking your trio, Mcraken could not be any more solid.  Never asked as a juvenile winning well clear, from well back, in all three trips.

Off the shelf, gives big weight in Tampa tour de force, then develops a filling and misses a work prior to Bluegrass.  Last four works outstanding, absolutely the most mature colt last ten, twelve years.

May not be favored... but should be! bbb

[TGJB]

A mature tour de force. Got it.

[TheBull]

BBB,

With all due respect, I never understood the whole \"never asked\" theory of upgrading performances. Just because a horse wasn\'t beaten to a pulp, doesnt mean it wasnt asked. And it doesnt mean that he would automatically run significantly faster if he WAS beaten to a pulp with the whip. In any case, watch the KY Jockey Club; I would not say that McCracken was \"never asked\".....far from it. True he wasnt\'t whipped 20 times down the lane, but he was definitely ridden very hard to prevail.

It is similar to others on this board trying to just arbitrarily give Always Dreaming lower numbers because of the ease of wins and not having to go particularly fast to win etc. The horse doesnt run a 4 until he runs a 4. If it\'s a 9 and you think he should improve off that because he hadnt knocked himself out yet, and is making the third start of his form cycle and has room to move forward as an early season 3yo etc, that\'s fine. But I cant just cross out a 9 and make it a 4 to fit my opinion.

Back to McCracken.....you see alot of the positives, and I see more of the negatives. I see a horse who has never run fast enough to win this, while off a backward line and running the worst race of his life last time out...a race that came after an injury that caused him to miss signifcant training time and a scheduled race. If you want to say that he wasnt cranked and draw a line through it, ok....but he still hasnt run fast enough to win. Combined that with his running style forcing him to potentially waste his number by either being in traffic or very wide, not to mention one of the top 4-5 wagering options, and he seems to be an easy toss for me.

But that\'s the beauty of this time of year....debates are lively and the juices are flowing. Things are heating up and it\'s the best time of the year!

[Wrongly]

Bull

Backward line?  Who\'s numbers are you looking at?  Visually you can say he wasn\'t stunning in the Bluegrass and maybe doesn\'t want more distance.  He comes in with a pair up and can easily go forward in the Derby.  Think he\'s the most likely horse to hit the board.  Does he win, I don\'t know but he\'s an easy horse to use in my plays.  Lots of reason to toss underlays coming off big tops, I see very few reasons to toss McCraken at 10-1.  Best of luck.  T.

[ajkreider]

Songbird looks like a prime example of needing to upgrade the performance.  No idea how you would go about assigning different numbers, but there was obviously more there - and she showed it later.

AD\'s allowance figure was, as Sek points out, more a result of the very slow early pace than the \"ease\" of how it was done.  There\'s only so much time you can make up on the back end - and it\'s exaggerated by the fact that that allowance was longer than the comparison races for that day.  Those others would have been (probably) slowing down dramatically while AD was still flying along.

[TheBull]

Thats my mistake. I haven\'t seen the sheet yet; was sort of just assuming it was a slightly backwards move (like it is on some \"other\" numbers). It makes the line more positive Id agree with you there. If he does move forward, do you get a little leery about him wasting that number with ground loss given his running style? Just trying to spark some discussion. It is all meant in good spirits.

[SoCalMan2]

ajkreider Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Songbird looks like a prime example of needing to
> upgrade the performance.  No idea how you would go
> about assigning different numbers, but there was
> obviously more there - and she showed it later.
>
> AD\'s allowance figure was, as Sek points out, more
> a result of the very slow early pace than the
> \"ease\" of how it was done.  There\'s only so much
> time you can make up on the back end - and it\'s
> exaggerated by the fact that that allowance was
> longer than the comparison races for that day.
> Those others would have been (probably) slowing
> down dramatically while AD was still flying along.


Isnt this discussion really about the \"h?\" designation?  It seems to me that if the horse gets a designation like that, you need to tread carefully on giving that figure too much credence.  When I see a \"h?\" I recognize that the horse might have been able to go faster and I take that into consideration in projecting a future figure.  It seems to me that the difference that is being talked about is that some people think the purveyor of the product sold here is too parsimonious in giving out the \"h?\" designations. Or have I misunderstood the discussion?