JB can speak for himself, but anyway:
A) How exactly do you look at one race, where the horses are (obviously) racing against themselves, and make a judgement about a whole different set of horses? By the way they look, the clock, the pace? It\'s almost like it would be better to have some sort of mathematical-ish number that measures velocity. What to call it . . . ..?
B) It was hardly only TG that made this assessment.
C) The seminar judgement, I\'m guessing, was made before the Derby was run.
D) The assessment, I\'m guessing, was made based on the 100 or so races the horses ran, in comparison to the thousand or so races of all the horses in those races. Or, we could just go with the Derby.
E) The track was all over the place. The allowance horses in the opening two races must have been the best, because they went the the 7F faster than the Grade 2 later in the day, and the mile race went a couple of seconds faster than the Pat Day mile. Or, maybe sealing the track did God knows what.
F) This is the farthest any of the them have run. Maybe you think it\'s silly to make judgments about a crop before the Derby, but then it\'s also silly to make that judgment after an anomaly of a race. We should wait two years, or something.
G) A bunch of horses did make up a bunch of ground - IR, Jack, Hofburg, even Audible. Just not enough to catch the top two.
By the numbers, it was easily the deepest crop - and it had the quickest ever runner coming in.